southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0,4095691.story Sox rolling dice in next week's Rule 5 draft Jordan Danks of the White Sox. (Phil Velasquez/Tribune photo) By Mark Gonzales Tribune reporter 10:07 a.m. CST, December 2, 2011 When the Chicago White Sox added players to their 40-man roster two weeks ago, one of the more notable omissions was outfielder Jordan Danks. Teams can select Danks and other eligible players for $50,000 at the Rule 5 draft next Thursday that traditionally concludes the annual winter meetings. Baseball America recently compiled a list of 32 players who could be drafted. Danks, who batted only .257 with 14 home runs and 65 RBIs in his second season at Triple-A Charlotte, wasn’t listed. Danks, however, is regarded as the best defensive outfielder in the Sox’s farm system, and teams seeking a late-inning replacement could be seeking a player like Danks. Sox outfielder Brandon Short was listed as a candidate to be drafted. Short was tied for fifth among Sox minor leagues with 75 RBIs last summer, and he hit .274 with four home runs and 15 RBIs for Mesa in the Arizona Fall League. One sleeper could be pitcher Terry Doyle, who impressed scouts by striking out 22 and walking only five in 27 1/3 innings for Mesa. Doyle was 4-0 with a 1.98 ERA, and his pinpoint control compensated for a lack of a dominating fastball. Doyle was 8-10 with a 3.07 ERA in 26 starts for Class-A Winston-Salem and Double-A Birmingham, but he struck out 122 and walked 33 in 173 innings. The Sox have four spots open on their 40-man roster, but those openings could be used to add prospects in the event they pull off trades for some of their more seasoned players. Among the Cubs’ candidates to be selected in the Rule 5 draft, according to Baseball America, are pitcher Ryan Searle and infielder/outfielder Ryan Flaherty. Players selected in the Rule 5 draft must stay on the major league roster for the entire season and be on the active roster for at least 90 days. If the selecting team fails to do this, the player's original team can regain the player for $25,000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Jordan Danks will absolutely be selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCsoxfan Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:39 PM) Jordan Danks will absolutely be selected. Can someone explain to me why with 4 slots on 40 man, we wouldnt protect more players? I know this is probably a dumb question! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 bye john, bye jordan. its been swell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Perhaps they were disappointed with Jordan's effort to change his approach. I am not going to second guess this decision with the knowledge I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:40 AM) Can someone explain to me why with 4 slots on 40 man, we wouldnt protect more players? I know this is probably a dumb question! The Sox are in all likelihood going to be making a bunch of trades where they send one out and get three or four players back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:39 AM) Jordan Danks will absolutely be selected. I was surprised that BA listed Short as the player likely to be selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrlesque Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (NCsoxfan @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:40 AM) Can someone explain to me why with 4 slots on 40 man, we wouldnt protect more players? I know this is probably a dumb question! It's not a dumb question- I don't understand it either. Unless the Sox are expecting a massive influx of players from the Danks1/Quentin/Thornton/whoever else trades that might go down next week, I don't know why they wouldn't protect Danks2/Kuhn/Short/Doyle. Not that any of those guys are super special, but in an organization thin on minor league talent, and with room on the 40-man, why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:48 AM) It's not a dumb question- I don't understand it either. Unless the Sox are expecting a massive influx of players from the Danks1/Quentin/Thornton/whoever else trades that might go down next week, I don't know why they wouldn't protect Danks2/Kuhn/Short/Doyle. Not that any of those guys are super special, but in an organization thin on minor league talent, and with room on the 40-man, why not? They could also be theoretically leaving room open for drafting someone in the Rule 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrlesque Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:59 AM) They could also be theoretically leaving room open for drafting someone in the Rule 5. Eh, it's possible, but I think it's more likely they're just prepping for some trades. KW hasn't done much with the Rule V in a long time, certainly not enough to leave 4 spots open for someone. He usually just passes. In fact, didn't he leave the Winter Meetings early last year, before the draft was even held? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Buehrlesque @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 11:11 AM) Eh, it's possible, but I think it's more likely they're just prepping for some trades. KW hasn't done much with the Rule V in a long time, certainly not enough to leave 4 spots open for someone. He usually just passes. In fact, didn't he leave the Winter Meetings early last year, before the draft was even held? I have no doubt it is roster spots for trades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 10:39 AM) Jordan Danks will absolutely be selected. And who cares? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 11:27 AM) And who cares? Not I. Apparently we're trading the only reason we've kept Jordan around this long anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 11:29 AM) Not I. Apparently we're trading the only reason we've kept Jordan around this long anyway. Haha, that's been my exact stance for a while now. Awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Nobody is trading me. If so, I'm definitely worth Bryce Harper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:27 PM) And who cares? QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:29 PM) Not I. Apparently we're trading the only reason we've kept Jordan around this long anyway. "Well, sure, we could move Alex Rios, he's hit OK, but we lost our defensive replacement CF in the Rule 5 draft. So I guess we're going to have to hold onto Rios for another year." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:03 PM) "Well, sure, we could move Alex Rios, he's hit OK, but we lost our defensive replacement CF in the Rule 5 draft. So I guess we're going to have to hold onto Rios for another year." De Aza? Lillibridge? Absolutely anybody, as in that case, we'd likely be rebuilding anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:03 PM) "Well, sure, we could move Alex Rios, he's hit OK, but we lost our defensive replacement CF in the Rule 5 draft. So I guess we're going to have to hold onto Rios for another year." The idea that Jordan Danks missing would stop the Sox from dealing Alex Rios if they had a chance is hysterical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 11:39 AM) Nobody is trading me. If so, I'm definitely worth Bryce Harper. Only if the name of the game is 40's and masturbation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 01:08 PM) The idea that Jordan Danks missing would stop the Sox from dealing Alex Rios if they had a chance is hysterical. I'd really like to believe that, but I'm in a pessimistic mood on this team right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 2, 2011 Author Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 12:15 PM) I'd really like to believe that, but I'm in a pessimistic mood on this team right now. So the Sox are looking to move Danks, Thornton, Quentin, and not bring back Buehrle because of payroll problems, but they wouldn't deal Rios if they had the chance? All because they had Jordan Danks picked in the rule 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 01:29 PM) So the Sox are looking to move Danks, Thornton, Quentin, and not bring back Buehrle because of payroll problems, but they wouldn't deal Rios if they had the chance? All because they had Jordan Danks picked in the rule 5 They should have been aggressive and moved Rios in 2010, but didn't do so because they were "Borderline" in the race, and then a miracle occurred. "Borderline in the race" has been enough reason to fail to do what was necessary for this team 2 years in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) They should have been aggressive and moved Rios in 2010, but didn't do so because they were "Borderline" in the race, and then a miracle occurred. "Borderline in the race" has been enough reason to fail to do what was necessary for this team 2 years in a row. Probably longer than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Dec 2, 2011 -> 02:28 PM) Probably longer than that. True, that's why Rios was picked up in the first place. Ditto Peavy..."Borderline in the race". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danman31 Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 It's interesting that no one here seems to value Jordan yet multiple people are certain he will be taken. So either MLB teams value him as a 25-man roster player or he has no value. Which is it? I'd be surprised if someone took him, though not shocked. I'd be shocked if he stuck on a 25-man roster for a full season though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.