James Shields

[Can_of_corn]

I don't see the O's being willing to write a check big enough to get Shields.

[Tx Oriole]

16 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see the O's being willing to write a check big enough to get Shields.

Nor do I see the O’s signing Shields. 

[jjnono]

On 2/20/2019 at 3:38 PM, SteveA said:

All waiting for the Keuchel domino to fall.

I don't disagree with this, but I think for many players that will be a problem, primarily because Keuchel isn't going to any team unless he gets HIS price.  There was a recent article in SI about Keuchel, and apparently he's had many, many offers, but he's rejected them all because they haven't met his own expectations about what he's worth.  And before you go saying 'players always overestimate their own worth," the article makes it clear that Keuchel has done his homework and applied the same valuation techniques that most front offices use.  Here's the article and pertinent section:

https://www.si.com/mlb/2019/05/07/dallas-keuchel-free-agency-decision-offers-wait

"It's not just the front offices who have all these numbers," Keuchel said. "Players and agencies now have the access and the knowledge to do the same thing. My asking price and my due diligence is not just out of left field. It has come to me through my own career path, my own career numbers, and then what my market is valued at this point in time. To this point it hasn’t been matched.... I'm not asking for the world."

All of this, if true, brings us to some interesting questions about who is controlling the current player valuation market.   For instance, are GMs truthful in their player evaluations?  Or do they ignore them subjectively when it suits them to do so?  And are players better off with or without a "union first" mentality?  Anyway, I just thought that was interesting..  

[interloper]

35 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see the O's being willing to write a check big enough to get Shields.

What would be the point anyway? We have enough Shields-esque guys to throw at the rotation. 

[Frobby]

50 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Didnt we already try Santana once before?????

That was Yohan Santana, not Ervin.  

[Redskins Rick]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That was Yohan Santana, not Ervin.  

lol thanks

[SteveA]

2 hours ago, jjnono said:

I don't disagree with this, but I think for many players that will be a problem, primarily because Keuchel isn't going to any team unless he gets HIS price.  There was a recent article in SI about Keuchel, and apparently he's had many, many offers, but he's rejected them all because they haven't met his own expectations about what he's worth.  And before you go saying 'players always overestimate their own worth," the article makes it clear that Keuchel has done his homework and applied the same valuation techniques that most front offices use.  Here's the article and pertinent section:

https://www.si.com/mlb/2019/05/07/dallas-keuchel-free-agency-decision-offers-wait

"It's not just the front offices who have all these numbers," Keuchel said. "Players and agencies now have the access and the knowledge to do the same thing. My asking price and my due diligence is not just out of left field. It has come to me through my own career path, my own career numbers, and then what my market is valued at this point in time. To this point it hasn’t been matched.... I'm not asking for the world."

All of this, if true, brings us to some interesting questions about who is controlling the current player valuation market.   For instance, are GMs truthful in their player evaluations?  Or do they ignore them subjectively when it suits them to do so?  And are players better off with or without a "union first" mentality?  Anyway, I just thought that was interesting..  

Well, I did post that remark in February.   I don't think anyone is waiting for the Keuchel domino now!

[jjnono]

19 minutes ago, SteveA said:

Well, I did post that remark in February.   I don't think anyone is waiting for the Keuchel domino now!

Ha ha!  Sorry, I didn't even pick up on that...  (eyeroll).  I'm still intrigued by the idea that players are trying to own the valuation formulas against owners.  Certainly in eras past, both sides would come to their own determinations on "value" though those were often far apart, as they would tend to interpret statistics to their own use.  But if the "new" valuation formulas are less subjective, it strikes me there should be less argument over a player's value, and that the only argument is really if you want to pay for that value...