ADVERTISEMENT

James Shields signs with San Diego

A

adp98

Post 'Til Your Fingers Bleed
Gold Member
Feb 25, 2005
42,682
3,271
113
4 years between $72-78 million. In today's market holding it 4 years isn't awful. From Joel Sherman below:

1. San Diego arguably has been the most aggressive team trying to trade for the Phillies' Cole Hamels, who is younger and better than Shields. However, Hamels has at least four years and $96 million left on his contract, and it could go higher depending if he triggers vesting option provisions. Plus, to get Hamels, San Diego would have to give up elite prospects. All of their wheeling-and-dealing has depleted the system, yet the Padres did not surrender three prized farmhands: catcher Austin Hedges, pitcher Matt Wisler and outfielder Hunter Renfroe.
However, because the Royals put the qualifying offer on Shields, San Diego would lose the 13th pick in the draft by signing of Shields.
 
Cool. One less guy to worry about at the deadline. Plus, teams serious about winning wouldn't want Sheilds over Hamels anyway. Look, you either want the best shot at winning or you want to hold onto a few kids who have done nothing, I mean nothing, at the ML level. Your call.
 
Shields at 75M as opposed to Hamels at 98 spread over 4 years is chump change and short sighted - plus is cost them the #13 pick in this year's draft. Chris Sale went 13 just 3 or 4 years ago. Not a bad little prospect . Flip side is, if RAJ held out for 2 of those top 3 guys SD has left after wheeling all winter , that's a decision he has to gamble on moving forward I guess. But if SD was unwilling to include any of them - no reason to let Hamels go for junk.

Stil think Yankees are hamels destination - they knew better than to go for a 33 year old diminishing Sheilds even at that manageable price. And they need him more than SD does.
 
Originally posted by wcburrs87:
Cool. One less guy to worry about at the deadline. Plus, teams serious about winning wouldn't want Sheilds over Hamels anyway. Look, you either want the best shot at winning or you want to hold onto a few kids who have done nothing, I mean nothing, at the ML level. Your call.
Click to expand...
Shields by virtue of his FA was not a candidate to move the deadline. Those guys all still out there. Just one less team in the market to take on salary.
 
Definitely a penny-wise, pound foolish move by SD. Indicative of why they have as many WS titles all-time and recent playoff series victories as the Nationals. Should they get back with this crew, Shields will help ensure they don't see the NLCS.

Btw, I'm still ticked off that the Phillies went all-in in 2012 to sweep the Braves, when a matchup with a toothless SD team that they beat in every game that year was the alternative to the Cards. Managerial malpractice by Chollie there.
 
Shields could of signed a 1-year contract ala E. Santana and someone else last year at this time. The Padres will probably still stink, plus they play in a division with SF and LAD. chances of them looking for an arm at deadline was slim anyway. I'm not really worried about this even though you have it all figured out. If Hamels is pitching well and the Phillies stink, then some team will come calling for his services. They present a fair offer and he can be had. If not, no big deal to me and no sleep will be lost.
 
Originally posted by wcburrs87:
Cool. One less guy to worry about at the deadline. Plus, teams serious about winning wouldn't want Sheilds over Hamels anyway. Look, you either want the best shot at winning or you want to hold onto a few kids who have done nothing, I mean nothing, at the ML level. Your call.
Click to expand...
What does this even mean? Unless you are the Dodgers, big difference between Shields getting 75 million over 4 years and Hamels getting 95 million over 4 years. That's 20 Million that could buy you two bullpen arms or more. On a contender, that's a big deal. Since when did $20 Million become irrelevant?
 
What it means is that I'd prefer a younger, better Hameks over Shields.
 
Option in Shields' deal that gets him close to 91M. Not sure who hold it, but it's there. Closer to Hamels even more.
 
Originally posted by wcburrs87:
Shields could of signed a 1-year contract ala E. Santana and someone else last year at this time. The Padres will probably still stink, plus they play in a division with SF and LAD. chances of them looking for an arm at deadline was slim anyway. I'm not really worried about this even though you have it all figured out. If Hamels is pitching well and the Phillies stink, then some team will come calling for his services. They present a fair offer and he can be had. If not, no big deal to me and no sleep will be lost.
Click to expand...
no, James Shields was not signing a one year deal. Regardless, this deal just further diminishes Hamels value. $20 million plus a trade kicker, plus no prospects to sign these other pitchers. Phillies problem is they have no leverage because he has to be traded. Too many other arms available for a lot less and the money matters. Why I said originally they must eat lots of money to get the return they seek. If not, they'll continue to sit around waiting for an offer that's not coming. Each start Hamels losses value. If he doesn't pitch well the entire bottom falls out. Just poorly executed by the Rube.
 
Read this yesterday. I agree with it. And since ADP's has pounded the Google pavement so hard recently i figured it was time for me to get in on the act.

Opposite view
 
Yes, poorly executed by Rubes but this deal doesn't really do anything to Hamels value besides most likely eliminating the Padres from trading for him. It's proven year after year that teams will pay highly for good pitching at the deadline so not worried yet.
 
What do you mean no prospects to sign these other pitchers? So, the teams they are currently on will just give them away come mid-July? Also, the threat of injury only applies to Hamels? I think I'm starting to get it......

Oh yea, so all these guys that might be available, why aren't teams trading them now? Is there value not diminishing, too?

Man, it's going to be a great time to be contender come March. For the first time ever AS caliber pitchers are going to be given away by their current teams.
 
Sure, if you have unlimited resources. But most teams don't. That 20 million over 4 years is a lot of money. And if the option is a 5th year that brings it to 91 over 5, that's still cheaper than Hamels.

You pretend that there isn't a 20+ million difference. It's not like they have AJ Burnett 80 Million over 5 years.
 
Originally posted by selmore1:
Yes, poorly executed by Rubes but this deal doesn't really do anything to Hamels value besides most likely eliminating the Padres from trading for him. It's proven year after year that teams will pay highly for good pitching at the deadline so not worried yet.
Click to expand...
There is not a lot to portend Rube can hit a home run here, but until he has either gotten a poor return or not dealt him at all, you cannot say this was poorly executed. Market has not been there for him yet. Hasn't been there for anyone yet really.

Also, it's not really proven that teams will pay more at the deadline than they will in the off season.The deadline cuts both ways - it doesnt take much to understand who is fire sale mode. I tend to think off season deals are better fro all involved. The KC deal for Shields netted TB a great return, the Mets did well with RA Dickey two winters ago, just a recent examples. Twins did pretty well on the Santana deal a few years before that. Obvioulsy have not done a ton research on this, but it kind of feels that way. Not a huge deadline deal guy myself.

A few years ago the Mets were pretty ceratain they were not going to sign jose reyes, but teams low balled them with junk. He was not moved. I am glad he wasnt. Not that I like Reyes so much, but happy he wasnt given away for jack. But teams thought the Mets were bluffing and thought they could steal him for nothing. As burrs said, and i agree with, I dont see RAJ giving away Hamels for low level guys. No need. But i do think he'd be smart to try and sell this trade sooner than later.
 
Originally posted by wcburrs87:
Read this yesterday. I agree with it. And since ADP's has pounded the Google pavement so hard recently i figured it was time for me to get in on the act.
Click to expand...
Did you really just link a Buck County Paper? That is awesome.
 
Originally posted by kjbert:
Sure, if you have unlimited resources. But most teams don't. That 20 million over 4 years is a lot of money. And if the option is a 5th year that brings it to 91 over 5, that's still cheaper than Hamels.

You pretend that there isn't a 20+ million difference. It's not like they have AJ Burnett 80 Million over 5 years.
Click to expand...
It's a club controlled option. With the Hamels kicker the money is actually 30+million.
 
My bad. I guess only stories by Buster Olney count. Add it to the list of things that I have learned in this thread.
 
Originally posted by Ninetynine5.0:
Originally posted by selmore1:
Yes, poorly executed by Rubes but this deal doesn't really do anything to Hamels value besides most likely eliminating the Padres from trading for him. It's proven year after year that teams will pay highly for good pitching at the deadline so not worried yet.
Click to expand...
There is not a lot to portend Rube can hit a home run here, but until he has either gotten a poor return or not dealt him at all, you cannot say this was poorly executed. Market has not been there for him yet. Hasn't been there for anyone yet really.

Also, it's not really proven that teams will pay more at the deadline than they will in the off season.The deadline cuts both ways - it doesnt take much to understand who is fire sale mode. I tend to think off season deals are better fro all involved. The KC deal for Shields netted TB a great return, the Mets did well with RA Dickey two winters ago, just a recent examples. Twins did pretty well on the Santana deal a few years before that. Obvioulsy have not done a ton research on this, but it kind of feels that way. Not a huge deadline deal guy myself.

A few years ago the Mets were pretty ceratain they were not going to sign jose reyes, but teams low balled them with junk. He was not moved. I am glad he wasnt. Not that I like Reyes so much, but happy he wasnt given away for jack. But teams thought the Mets were bluffing and thought they could steal him for nothing. As burrs said, and i agree with, I dont see RAJ giving away Hamels for low level guys. No need. But i do think he'd be smart to try and sell this trade sooner than later.
Click to expand...
and the Mets got absolutely nothing for Reyes so clearly that worked out well. The Phillies gain nothing by paying Hemels $24 million to pitch for a team that will lose 90 games. They have waved the white flag. So the fact is with every pay check the Phillies are eating salary by paying Hamels to pitch for a team with zero chance of competing. So there is a need to move him.
 
Originally posted by adp98:

Originally posted by Ninetynine5.0:
Originally posted by selmore1:
Yes, poorly executed by Rubes but this deal doesn't really do anything to Hamels value besides most likely eliminating the Padres from trading for him. It's proven year after year that teams will pay highly for good pitching at the deadline so not worried yet.
Click to expand...
There is not a lot to portend Rube can hit a home run here, but until he has either gotten a poor return or not dealt him at all, you cannot say this was poorly executed. Market has not been there for him yet. Hasn't been there for anyone yet really.

Also, it's not really proven that teams will pay more at the deadline than they will in the off season.The deadline cuts both ways - it doesnt take much to understand who is fire sale mode. I tend to think off season deals are better fro all involved. The KC deal for Shields netted TB a great return, the Mets did well with RA Dickey two winters ago, just a recent examples. Twins did pretty well on the Santana deal a few years before that. Obvioulsy have not done a ton research on this, but it kind of feels that way. Not a huge deadline deal guy myself.

A few years ago the Mets were pretty ceratain they were not going to sign jose reyes, but teams low balled them with junk. He was not moved. I am glad he wasnt. Not that I like Reyes so much, but happy he wasnt given away for jack. But teams thought the Mets were bluffing and thought they could steal him for nothing. As burrs said, and i agree with, I dont see RAJ giving away Hamels for low level guys. No need. But i do think he'd be smart to try and sell this trade sooner than later.
Click to expand...
and the Mets got absolutely nothing for Reyes so clearly that worked out well. The Phillies gain nothing by paying Hemels $24 million to pitch for a team that will lose 90 games. They have waved the white flag. So the fact is with every pay check the Phillies are eating salary by paying Hamels to pitch for a team with zero chance of competing. So there is a need to move him.
Click to expand...
They got a sandwhich pick (which you get when someone signs your player, not when you sign a player fyi) - and who cares - they were offered jack. No reason to trade him Rather not give him away than get bad players and no pick.

Far as Hamels goes, he will still bring people to the park, moreso than some no name who will pitch in his stead. So it's not a total loss. And why give him away for nothing ? To save a few million? Why not see if the market develops. You can alwasy give a good player away for nothing. That's not hard. Even one who is owed 80M
 
Or you could just eat some money to maximize your return now and facilitate the rebuild. But you're right. It makes better to hold a declining asset while the market diminishes drives down his value. Rube's got them all right where he wants them.
 
If he's 4-6 or 5-5 on June 15th, with a 2.88 ERA and his routine K total, is he a diminishing asset?
Sounds fairly possible, even probable, that this is what he can be. And if he is, there is nothing diminishing about him - he's more likely the deadline's biggest prize. I'm not convinced he'll make it that far though.
 
Here is the question: do you trust Ruin tomorrow to pull off a monster trade when he has no leverage, it decreases by the day, the market is moving away from him, and each day closer to the deadline a massive crop of similar pitchers can be had for a lot less in terms of prospects? He's stuck. His only way out is to eat a significant portion of money. My entire point. Until he does that the Phillies are stuck in the same spot today. The market is moving away from them and Hamels values goes down. You guys can't even figure out how the Shields signing hurts the Phillies. He got 35 million less and it cost no prospects. Yet, you continue to believe beyond all history to this point that rube has it. He's making Billy king look competent.
 
Well the market definitely isn't getting away from them. There's zero incentive for teams to rush into a deal now, they need to see what they have, assess the situation and then make a deal during the season. There will be some surprise teams who need a guy for the final push and that's why this is so hard to predict.
 
I guess I'm really confused about how the last 50 years has produced a market demand for left handed pitching and now there is no market for one of the best one in the game because there are a few other lesser versions available. RAJ is no Branch Ricky , but a monkey can pull this off. And he's nkt the only guy over there.
 
You guys have put your faith in the worst GM in baseball. Good luck with that approach.
 
Originally posted by adp98:
You guys have put your faith in the worst GM in baseball. Good luck with that approach.
Click to expand...
Gillick will be pulling the strings here. RAJ is just the front man.

So, basically what you're saying is just get what you can because the market will worsen, he could get hurt, and his production might diminish in the next 4-5 months. Ok, I got it....
 
ADP, it's unreal how you change arguments as things go on. Now it's about the GM. But yea, he sucks. Have zero faith. When was the last time he got the best out of a trade? The Drabek/Holliday swap? Has there been anything else? I do not have faith because he really hasn't shown that he's good at getting prospects for proven players.
 
Originally posted by adp98:


The Phillies gain nothing by paying Hemels $24 million to pitch for a team that will lose 90 games. They have waved the white flag. So the fact is with every pay check the Phillies are eating salary by paying Hamels to pitch for a team with zero chance of competing. So there is a need to move him.
Click to expand...
Disagree. Phillies still have a need to sell some tickets if at all possible. They are back at the "come down to the park, enjoy the atmosphere, etc." stage. Having days when you also stand to be the winner with Hamels on the mound, a guy who is a top pitcher and has been with the team his whole career, has value and you'll get some extra fannies in seats/"walkup" sales on those nights.

So you don't just sell to the highest bidder right away. There are other considerations that are valid.

And no one is trusting Amaro here. At the same time Phils' fans remember the really pretty mediocre at best package they got for Schilling for instance (Padilla was headliner), or more recently the Lee to Seattle deal (based on a limited market and a hanging offense in and of itself), or Victorino or Pence when they just "had to" trade the guy then and there, and realize sometimes it's better to take a calculated risk and wait.
 
Originally posted by selmore1:
ADP, it's unreal how you change arguments as things go on. Now it's about the GM. But yea, he sucks. Have zero faith. When was the last time he got the best out of a trade? The Drabek/Holliday swap? Has there been anything else? I do not have faith because he really hasn't shown that he's good at getting prospects for proven players.
Click to expand...
Agree. And because he has to "win the trade" he waited too long. Now the Phils missed their window to maximize return. So the next step is to eat a bunch of money and get the best deal you can. The longer it goes the worst for the Phils. You guys are starting to get it. Now just agree they need to eat a bunch of money and we acknowledge I was right, Ruben stinks and we can all move along.
 
ADP, lets say that they get no great offers this year, Hamels has an awesome year, they keep him and then trade him next offseason/deadline. Then there's 1 year less on deal and he's still pitching great. Why would that be a problem for the Phils. Could show teams they're not going to just give him away and make teams step up their offer.
 
Lowry, phillie fans are great. They have a long established history of showing up despite the record.
 
Originally posted by adp98:
Lowry, phillie fans are great. They have a long established history of showing up despite the record.
Click to expand...
No, they haven't really. Before they built the bank they were near the bottom, and last year they stayed away in droves by comparison to two years prior.
 
Originally posted by Ninetynine5.0:
Originally posted by adp98:
Lowry, phillie fans are great. They have a long established history of showing up despite the record.
Click to expand...
No, they haven't really. Before they built the bank they were near the bottom, and last year they stayed away in droves by comparison to two years prior.
Click to expand...
And still only drew 2K less on average per night than the first place, 96-win Nats. Sweet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TheDean

Hamels

Replies
64
Views
2K
Bench Warmers 4.6
wcburrs87
wcburrs87
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back