The b2b "how's that working out for ya?" thread

Much ado about nothing. Don't count me as one who believes McCarthy will be on the team for the length of his contract. The Dodgers just paid big $ in order for Wilson, Haren, and others to leave..I think they've shown that they're willing to do what it takes to bounce a guy out of town when they feel the time's right. He'll probably be dealt before that 4th year as he's pretty much holding one of the young gun's spot until they're ready.

Remember, the purpose of this new regime is to become more farm reliant. It's already happened in the OF..it's about to happen at SS..expect the same in regards to the pitching staff. I give McCarthy two years before he's dealt..if he makes it to the final year of his contract, then I assume he'll be DFA'd during that off-season.

Bottom line..the Dodgers gave McCarthy what it took to gain his services and they likely did so with him being a stop gap in mind. Nobody should expect McCarthy's signing to block Urias, Chris Anderson, De Leon, Holmes ( and even perhaps Reed, Wieland, Frias and Lee should they become viable options) from moving into the rotation at some point between 2016 and 2018. Urias and Anderson have 2016 ETA's..De Leon has a 2017 ETA..Holmes has a 2018 ETA..and if they sign the Cuban kid/phenom Yadier Alvarez that they're rumored to already have lined up you can pretty much put a 2018 ETA on him as well because of the $. Until then..they keep winning McCarthy's starts. Haha

 

We get it, you're always right. Thanks.

Pitchers shouldnt have pain in their elbow? That's insight

 

Not really, because he is sticking Lee in the rotation in his scenario, so it is would you rather have Shields and Lee in your rotation or Anderson and MehCarthy?

 

You are confusing him with @back2back x 2 + 1

 

Maybe McCarthy's deal seemed high because of his injury history, but if I'm being honest EVERY long pitcher deal over the past several years has seemed high. If overpaying is the new standard, then it's not overpaying. There's still a lot of time left on McCarthy's deal and we don't even know the extent of his injury, so calling him a bust at this point is ludicrous. He was a high risk/high reward player - that's the kind of guys we want. Guys who if things are going well are difference makers, and not just inning eaters.

 

No, I'm wrong a lot and I admit it, see Greinke signing that I was DEAD WRONG about. But you're always condescending, so thanks.

Do you want your pitchers to have pain in their elbow? Let's go sign all of those guys. Nice insight, the Angels will do well.

 

McCarthy at $48M + Anderson at $10M = $58M and we only have Anderson for a year. Assuming Anderson gets the same AAS, then we add $30M for the extra three years and we are at $88M

Shields would likely have taken less from the Dodgers because he REALLY wanted to pitch here, but we will use his contract. Shields at $75 + Lee at $10M (assumptions for 4 year totals) = $85M and we have them BOTH for 4 years. IMO, it's not even close.

 

I know what you are saying and I get it 100%. Just saying IMO opinion, I'd rather have those two as #4 and #5 then McCarthy and Anderson. I'd gamble on them instead of who we have. After all, we are just talking about gambling and percentages here unless we KNOW the future. Also, I think a #1-4 of CK, Greinke, Ryu and Shields is amazing.

 

You don't think Shields has $6.75M more value than McCarthy? Not being rhetorical or being a dick, but asking genuinely....especially in light of the budget we have?

 

I'm a fan of both McCarthy and Shields, and I'd say given the value of what $6.75 million buys in pitching these days, Shields is worth that much more.

I'm not sure where we were on the whole deal - I feel like when we signed McCarthy, Shields was still looking for a Lester-size contract. So it could just be that we would have lost the chance to sign McCarthy if we held out for Shields. Maybe the nerds are kicking themselves. Or maybe they never really wanted Shields, afterall Freeman should know him well.

 

Pretty much every addition they made this off-season had long term flexibility in mind. If signing Shields falls into the long term flexibility category to you, we're just gonna have to disagree.

You pick up Shields at his current age, price, and for that amount of years..you're stuck. " Stuck " as in, by the time you start to feel like you need to shop him because he's showing cracks and/or the kids are ready, he's still got all that money left on his contract and no return is gonna make sense from a value standpoint.

Shields would've been a pick up to make a run at the WS this year, with him perhaps having enough left to make an impact next year as well. Saying " fuck it " and going for the WS is fine for some. However, again, this current front office/regime is past the point of chasing 1yr dreams. It's gotta make sense over a long period of time now..they have a farm that's going to lend the tools..to them it doesn't make sense to lock it up.

I mean even if you say that Shields could've replaced Greinke should he leave at the end of the year..do you want Shields to be the replacement for Greinke?..or a younger/better Cueto, Price, or Zimmermann? Shields just didn't make sense for them.

 

Shields and McCarthy both signed 4 year deals, so I fail to see the flexibility there. Sure Shields will be paid more, but Shields will also likely pitch 800+ innings in 4 years whereas McCarthy may soon only have one elbow left.

What's easier to trade, a Shields that will eat innings and pitch to a 3.75 ERA at $16.75M for the last couple of years or McCarthy who can't pitch because he has one elbow (clearly being sarcastic, but you get my drift) for $12M a year?

 

If you know the older, more overworked guy is gonna be paid a lot more then you do not fail to see the flexibility. And the guys above just explained the injury part of the equation as well.

You're assuming that Shields isn't gonna wear down and I am. And there lies the reason for Shields' contract demands spiraling down and crashing during this off-season. Most every team that had interest wasn't buying the notion that he's gonna give 800-1000 innings over the next 4-5 years because he's old and has major mileage on that arm. He went from asking for 5yrs/120M to what you see today.

 

Shields was clearly on the 'get all that I can while I can' mindset.. and who can blame him? So he overvalued himself and then had to hunker down to get what he got. I agree with the prior post that he definitely good for 2 years/400 innings and maybe for 3 years but 5 years is asking a lot because I can't see year 4 or year 5 being worth much.

I'm sure that someone here will quote me in 2018