How James Shields Could Now Maximize His Earnings

Well, this whole James Shields situation sure is bizarre.

Back in October, the FanGraphs Crowd collectively projected that Shields would be the fourth-highest-paid free agent of the winter, in line for something like a 5-year/$90M contract. And now, this week, Tony Blengino took a look around the league, found very few teams who both had available money and a need to add to the top of their rotation, and predicted that Shields would sign with the Giants for 4 years/$75M.

If Tony’s prediction comes to pass, Shields would be leaving more than just $15M on the table. The actual contracts received by other top-flight free agents have well outpaced the Crowd’s projections. Max Scherzer received $210M (or so) over seven years after being projected to receive $168M. Fellow mega-earners Jon Lester ($155M v. $132M), Pablo Sandoval ($95M v. $80M), and Russell Martin ($82M v. $56M) also saw very meaningful increases over their crowdsourced projections.

That’s a pretty big chunk of hypothetical money to leave on the table, for the sake of — well, I’m not totally sure: maybe Shields’ finicky pursuit of a just-right situation? While there have been rumbles here and there throughout the winter about such-and-such team being interested in pursuing Shields, we still know next to nothing about Shields’ own values and priorities for his new home, and we don’t know a lot about any concrete offers that may have been extended his way. This is the rare baseball story that has remained in near-total stasis for three-plus months.

If Shields simply wants to earn as much money as he possibly can with his next contract, it would seem that he missed his golden opportunity to do so earlier in the winter, when teams still had large chunks of their budget empty and unreserved. So here’s an idea as to what Shields might do now to earn the most money possible from his playing career. Please note that the speculations to follow are pure speculation, and have no basis on real-life news. (Which, said real-life news includes an MLBTradeRumors report that Shields could sign by the end of the week.) But this will not stop me from imagining:

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

What if James Shields waiting until a contending team lost a starter to Tommy John surgery in order to sign a contract? Furthermore — what if he signed a one-year contract at a significantly high per-year value and then entered the free agent market again in the winter of 2015, equipped with all the lessons learned from this winter’s awkward free agency?

It’s been established, over so many years and so many transactions, that teams who wish to trade for present-tense, veteran help must pay a significantly higher price if they trade in-season instead of during the offseason. I.e.: last July, the A’s had to give up prospect of great price Addison Russell in exchange for a year and a half of Jeff Samardzija and half a year of Jason Hammel. And then, this winter, the A’s traded away two arbitration years of Brandon Moss and received the non-blockbuster return of Joey Wendle, a sixth-round pick in 2012.

Isn’t this pre-dawn moment before Spring Training the very time in the baseball calendar when a player’s value to a proposed new team would be at its lowest? This is the one moment of the year when the best-laid plans actually still resemble best-laid plans. Offseason plans have been executed and thirty rosters sit, fully-formed, just waiting to outperform their projections.

In other words: the elbow tendons have not yet hit the fan.

Shields’ best negotiating tactic at this point may just be to use a team’s suddenly dire need to fill in a spot in the rotation against them. While speculating about individual injuries seems cruel, it would also be silly to think that the dreaded specter of T.J. won’t cast its shadow over the 2015 season — and, specifically, over the starting rotation of a contending team.

Here was the notable damage from 2014 (which is excluding star pitchers from down teams, like Matt Moore in Tampa Bay or Patrick Corbin in Arizona):

Oakland A’sJarrod Parker succumbed to Tommy John on March 17 after 61 solid starts from 2012-13, his first two years in Oakland. Jesse Chavez filled in admirably, making 21 starts in 2014 after two previous starts in the whole of his big league career. Although it’s easy to automatically mentally exclude the A’s from pursuing any remotely pricey players, having a James Shields still around on the free agent market would have benefited the 2014 A’s, who paid a hard-to-quantify but undoubtedly major price for additional rotation help at the trade deadline. In hindsight, would the A’s rather have paid Shields $20M for one year and kept Russell around, or have things play out as they actually did? What if Shields cost $25M for one year?

Miami Marlins – It would be supremely bold of Shields to wait past Spring Training and then into the season to wait to sign with a team, but the additional wait could make a desperate team even more desperate. Wunderkind Jose Fernandez pitched his last game of 2014 on May 9, and at that point, the Marlins had the third-best record in the NL (20-16), and also the third-best Pythagorean Win% (.567). In September, Mike looked at the Marlins’ performance and concluded that they very easily could have made the playoffs were Fernandez healthy. While the Marlins are, yes, the Marlins, and are unlikely to pay big for Shields in any season, their ultimately nondescript 2014 season is a real-life case tragedy in how damaging losing one’s ace can be.

Atlanta Braves – This is probably the most instructive example for Shields, were he to try this high-risk gambit. It’s helpful to remember that the Braves of February 2014 were positioned mighty differently than these Braves of February 2015: by handing out extensions to players like Andrelton Simmons, Julio Tehran, and Freddie Freeman, it looked like the Braves were locking another NL East-dominating core into place for the foreseeable future. So, losing both Kris Medlen and Brandon Beachy to T.J. within one dark March week of each other meant a serious blow to the playoff hopes of a team that sincerely expected to make the playoffs. And thus, Ervin Santana was hastily signed, for one year and $14.1M.

This winter — his second consecutive venture into free agency — Santana signed with the Twins for 4 years/$55M (plus a $14M team option in 2019). Combine that with his Braves salary and Santana will earn $69.1M over five years. Before his first foray into free agency, the FanGraphs crowd predicted that he would receive a 3-year/$39.8M deal. At this point, following Santana’s path could be Shields’ most lucrative option.





Miles Wray contributes sports commentary to McSweeney's Internet Tendency, Ploughshares, The Classical and Hardwood Paroxysm. Follow him on Twitter @mileswray or email him here.

33 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Roger Clemens
11 years ago

Miles, I think you’re onto something here.

William
11 years ago

He has to gamble first that

1. A team with money, and not a lot of depth, loses a pitcher and wants to sign Shields.
2. He gets more money than he would if he just signed a one-year deal now.
3. He doesn’t perform worse after sitting out (Santana didn’t, Drew and Morales did.)

Ervin Santana’s one-year deal was about in-line AAV-wise with the crowdsource projections. Drew and Morales didn’t get significantly more money despite a need in one case (Drew’s). I don’t see the logic in sitting out until an injury happens. If he wants to go that route, I think Shields is better off signing a one-year deal ASAP and entering free agency again. However, he’s also 33, pitchers are susceptible to injury and performance loss, and no player has ever accepted a qualifying offer (indicating players strongly prefer security). I think he takes (and should take) whatever deal he can get.

Nate
11 years ago
Reply to  William

Are there rules preventing him playing on some independent league team for part of the season? If not, he could do that until a team needs him.

TangoAlphaLima
11 years ago
Reply to  William

He also has to gamble that he doesn’t severely injure himself this season, thereby tanking his value for the next contract.

Granted, Shields has made a good living thus far. Baseball Reference has him pegged for a little north of $39 mil thus far. But I’d think the difference between adding another $75 mil or another $100 mil is pretty negligible at this point, and thus not worth the gamble.

Jamie
11 years ago
Reply to  TangoAlphaLima

I’d argue that extra $25m is never a “negligible” amount of money. That’s, like, a new hospital wing or a private island. I’m not sure which of those things is more James Shields’ jam, but perhaps he would like to have enough for both.

Fred
11 years ago

The idea here is solid but I think it would only work if James Shields was by far the best pitcher in baseball or close to it; essentially teams would see him as ridiculously arrogant for holding out which might not work to his benefit in the long run.

Lt. Obvious
11 years ago

He’ll be 34 next year!

vivalajeter
11 years ago

According to his player’s page, he made about $40MM in his career through 2014. If he can get $75MM more, from a solid team in a great city and a great pitcher’s park, I think he should take it. It’s a higher AAV than the crowdsource (although, as mentioned many times, crowdsource is generally low), and it’s risk-free. If he really wants to pitch beyond 4 years, and he hasn’t fallen apart, then there will be at least a 1-year deal on the table after this contract is up.

I think part of the problem may be that teams don’t think of his as a difference maker, despite his nickname. If a $100MM+ deal wasn’t on the table this year, I doubt it would be on the table a year from now.

Kevin
11 years ago
Reply to  vivalajeter

But the point is that teams may not be willing to pay that for him right now, because so many have hopes/beliefs that their team won’t need him, and certainly not at that price.

Bobby Ayala
11 years ago

2014 was a bit of an extreme year as far as TJ surgeries go, right? Seems pretty unlikely that the right team would lose the right guy and have enough money to pay Shields what he thinks he deserves.

I think MLB teams know what Shields is worth, and its much less than the “community” seems to think. He’s an aging workhorse with a lot of mileage who faded during his team’s WS run last year. No one was ever going to give him 5 yrs/$90 mil or 4 yrs/$75 mil. If he gets $15mil AAV for 4 years he should count himself lucky and take it.

JAM
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

I think he can probably do a bit better then 15AAV over four years so long as he isn’t that picky about where he goes. If he’s gonna artificially lower his market by limiting his potential number of buyers then yes… if he gets offered 15 over four he should take it.

60M over 4 is probably a fair price but all it takes is for one GM/Owner to make a stupid offer and he could get a more then a fair price.

tenaciousdeucer
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

Agreed. After 2013, Ervin Santana held out for a 4/$50M deal and couldn’t find it. That he was able to spin rejection into a roundabout 5/$69M (as a best case scenario) means that Shields should just accept a 4/$65 or 5/$75M right now rather than take on the risk of the one year deal.

GMH
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

I suspect the Padres will offer Shields something close to $20 million AAV for four or five years.

WhatLeylandNoooo
11 years ago

That was supposed to say: “pitching available on the FA market next year” with an embedded link to here:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/09/2016-mlb-free-agents.html

geo
11 years ago

Yeah, if I’m James Shields there is no way in hell I want to be out there as a FA again next winter with that potential group on the market.

BMac
11 years ago
Reply to  geo

Is that sarcasm? Except for Greinke, Shields outclasses this group of pitchers, many of whom will not actually be free agents next year anyway. (They will sign extensions before that.)

He should TOTALLY for FA next year, and buy himself that island and hospital wing.

Plucky
11 years ago
Reply to  geo

BMac – David Price, Jordan Zimmerman, and Johnny Cueto say “Hi”

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago

If his market is really as bad as it appears right now, a smart progressive team just sign him for whatever it takes just for the sake of purchasing an undervalued asset. Who cares if you have a full rotation? There’s no such thing as too many pitchers. Who cares if you can’t afford $75M/4 over the long term? Just flip him for prospects in 4 months.

ecp
11 years ago
Reply to  Yirmiyahu

The issue with flipping him in four months is that any newly-signed free agent traded during the first year of his new contract can void the remaining years on his contract.

Atreyu Jones
11 years ago
Reply to  ecp

I think that rule is gone now.

Jensan
11 years ago

Toronto offers him 4/60 , $10 million year 1 , $20 million Year 2, $15 million Year 3 and $15 million Year 4
An option for Year 5 with $2 million dollar buyout at $10 million

pft
11 years ago

Made sense for Shields to wait until Lester and Scherzer came off the market. Trouble was neither came off very quick, and Scherzer just came off a couple of weeks ago. Moncanda also has some teams holding off committing more to the MLB budget

This is the time of year that players start reporting on physical problems that did not resolve over the offseason. Injuries even to position players have teams scrambling to make improvements.

This is not some Ubaldo or Santana of last year, but a very consistent pitcher over the last 4 years who has been a 3.8 run based WAR guy who has put up 230 IP a year.

Lot of good pitchers set to hit the market next year too so Shields best bet is still a multi-year deal. Teams that give it to him can still trade him at the deadline if the team does not perform as intended even with Shields help.
Its not like his deal will be an untradeable contract.

MLB teams are flush with money and teams payrolls as a percentage of revenue have not been so low for over 20 years, perhaps longer

Snarfle
11 years ago

This plan could make sense for someone, but not for James Shields in 2015. Teams are already wary of how he’ll age, and anyone signing him for four years has to assume he’ll be about average in years 3-4. I don’t think one can expect more than a one, maybe two-year deal from a team scrambling after an injury. That’s a situation when a team is more likely to patch than go big. And yeah, the last thing Shields needs is to be a year older in next year’s FA class. Yikes.

It seems the market for Shields isn’t what we thought it was going in, and teams may in fact be getting wiser about throwing huge deals at aging players. And yes, it took Scherzer a while to sign, and so it makes some sense that his market wouldn’t come to fruition until around now. He’ll sign within a week, maybe even by tomorrow, and I bet he does just fine. Maybe not $90M fine, but that number came from our expectations of owners/GMs, not Shields’ actual market value.

Dave G
11 years ago

The analysis here is very weak. The author lists several examples of teams suffering spring training injuries as the rationale for waiting. Yet in none of those examples did the team give out the kind of high AAV one-year contract that this article recommends as the route to maximizing Shields’ earnings. The opposite happened, most of the teams did nothing to fill the hole, one gave a contract at the exact value of the qualifying offer that Santana had already turned down. There is no reason to expect that this yea things will suddenly be different and the teams that lose pitchers in spring or early in the season would suddenly be freed from budget constraints.

Waiting now while a few more teams in need of pitching dole out their last few million on relievers makes no sense for maximizing this year’s salary and is even worse for 2016 and beyond, when the best Shields can hope for is having another 230 innings on his then-34 year old arm while competing with an even deeper and younger free agent class than he was contending with this year.

La Dee Da
11 years ago
Reply to  Dave G

Totally agree. The only example I can think of recently, in which a team lost a significant piece to injury late in the offseason and made am reactionary signing like the author suggests, was Prince signing with the Tigers. Aside from that, waiting for an injury in Spring seems like a terrible strategy, given the uncertainty of the desired result coming to pass (combined with Shields’ own uncertain future performance). If then Pads offer him 4/60, my guess is he takes the 100% chance at $60M over the less than 100% chance someone offers him $25M for one year after losing a pitcher to an injury (and then re-entering the market next offseason).

shthar
11 years ago

Theres always some big free agent who doesnt get signed even after spring training starts or even when the season stars.

This year it’s James. Maybe teams are getting smarter.

GMH
11 years ago

My guess is Shields signs with San Diego for 3 years at something close to $60 million guaranteed, with vesting options in years 4 and 5 based on innings pitched/absence of time on the DL – terms similar to Dan Haren’s most recent contract.

Lefty
11 years ago

I don’t think he would have to wait for an injury. Just let it be known he is seeking a 1-year deal and let the bidding war start. Hiroki Kuroda made something like 4/50 doing this every year in his age 35+ seasons.

Johnny Ringo
11 years ago

Everyone talks about how great the pitching market is next year, but what I mostly see is a lot of aging players, a lot of question marks, and only a few stars who might possibly get extended anyway and not even be on the market.

If you can get Shields now for a reasonable price I think you should go for it. (Here is looking at you Cubs).

BMac
11 years ago
Reply to  Johnny Ringo

Totally agree. Folks should eyeball that list again.

And nice point about the Cubs. Good fit there, obvious need, & they have the dough to get the deal done.

La Dee Da
11 years ago

Setting aside the fact this strategy seems unlikely to yield the desired/suggested result, I doubt James Shields wants to be seen as the dude who’s waiting for another pitcher to get injured so he can get his payday.

Granted, he’s not rooting for anyone (in particular or in general) to get injured; but, formulating a business strategy around benefitting financially from others’ misfortune just looks bad, no matter how well you rationalize it.

BMac
11 years ago
Reply to  La Dee Da

How did it hurt Santana?