James Shields got torched again today... Is this the norm?
Or do you guys think this is an abberation based upon the first 13 starts of this season. I figured the bubble would eventually burst, but I didn't think that he'd get lit up like this.
Let me know your thoughts as to how you perceive his performance to be the rest of the season....
Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler Filler
0 recs |
16 comments
Comments
yep!
a 9 era and 1.5 whip,
he's somehow regressed past last year,
his rookie year.
was he going to continue pushing near the top in the cy young race? probably not.
but he's still a very good 3 and solid 2 regardless of whats happened lately.
by god allah star on Jun 20, 2007 8:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
its not often
by wildthang on Jun 20, 2007 8:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
People have off nights
by dlpme77 on Jun 20, 2007 8:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think these are just two bad outings.
So far in June, he has 20 K's and only 2 walks in 25.1 innings. So, his K/BB has been great.
IMO His big problem has been homers. He's allowed 7 so far in those 25.1 innings. But, he's only allowed 1 double in those innings, if you ignore his Colorado start. (He allowed 2 at Colorado.)
by omambiyick on Jun 20, 2007 9:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Shields
by GregJP on Jun 20, 2007 9:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I love getting answers from tools, like you...
by JT12340 on Jun 21, 2007 2:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shields
by LipstickOnDipstick on Jun 21, 2007 2:58 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Shields
To a large extent I believe that the league is adjusting to him similar to what happened last year. He relies a lot on deception and there is only so long you can dominate with it. The increase in HRs are showing this. That said, he's got enough tools to settle in as a solid #3 type starter.
by pakdawgie on Jun 21, 2007 9:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
that makes zero sense
- adjusting to him? the two bad starts to which you refer were against NL teams. how is adjustment relevant? that makes no sense.
- increase in home runs? 7 home runs in April; 2 in May; 7 in June. Granted there's one start left in June, but basically except for May he's been susceptible to the long ball all year, but has remained effective.
- the premise of this thread is moronic. He hasn't been getting torched: he had one poor start in Coors, which is virtually to be expected, and gave up the 2 dingers yesterday in AZ. He still has great overall numbers, a 20/2 K/BB ratio in June (89/19 overall), and really it's kind of bizarre that there's some sort of irrational Shields hatred on this board. In May he also had one poor start and there was also an immediate thread started about how this was the real Shields.
by scooter on Jun 21, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adjusting
It's also interesting that a lot of folks (Baseball America, Keith Law) keep indicating that he is has a low ceiling.
by pakdawgie on Jun 21, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shields
Shields was pitching over his head earlier this season. He's not a 1.00 WHIP pitcher. Few are. His best seasons he'll probably be between 1.20 and 1.28. He's always going to give up dinger. With his K/9 that makes him an Aaron Harang type pitcher. The good starts will out number the bad but there will certainly be bad starts.
by natsfan2005 on Jun 21, 2007 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Homer-prone
by Brickhaus on Jun 21, 2007 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes
by was385 on Jun 21, 2007 12:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the downturn,
What's everyone's opinion about his repettiore?
by JT12340 on Jun 21, 2007 3:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
lmao
Tim Lincecum is a future #3 then too?
You can't adjust to a 80 pitch. PERIOD. END OF STORY.
He gave up a few bombs, he's given up bombs all year. If he gives up too many hits, those will be multi-run homers. If he doesn't, then he's working with 1 or 2 ER per game. On average, that will likely result in an ERA under or around 4.
It's as simple as that. The rest of you need to get a clue.
by youALREADYknow on Jun 21, 2007 9:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 












