Y2HH

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 10:36 AM) All right, so I think we are doing the extremely touristy thing and taking the kids to the Sky Deck of the Sears Tower on Monday (Yes, I still call it Sears, f*** Willis). I had no idea it was so damned expensive though, is there somewhere or way to get discounted tickets? They are $17 an adult and $11 a kid for regular price. I did it...paid full price, and aside from getting to re-enact the scene from Ferris Bueller's Day Off (which makes them very mad, by the way), it's a pretty overrated experience. I don't know of a way to get discounted tickets, though... :/ Oh, and when I did it, we showed up there having no idea what it cost...so we felt, ahh well...too late, may as well do it now...but it's pretty astounding how much they charge. If we had known it was that expensive prior to going, there is no way we would have actually done it.

QUOTE (pittshoganerkoff @ Jul 13, 2012 -> 09:16 AM) With Sam Raimi directing, the chance of a great movie increase. I realize it's a Disney movie, but I hope they don't get to cutesy with it. It's not just a Disney movie, but a kids movie, with an adult hook in that most adults grew up watching The Wizard of Oz. I believe this is a targeted G rating, so the question is how will Raimi deal with the constraints that brings? The teaser didn't have much in it other than scenery and a few character teases...I'm trying to be hopeful for a solid story/movie, but I fear this movie will fall off the deep end of stupid like Burton's Alice did, where all he seemed to care about was wonky characters (for no reason), and the over-use of over saturated colors. I thought Alice was going to be amazing...it wasn't.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 08:20 PM) For some reason, the cherry Dr. Pepper doesn't sound appealing. Probably better than it sounds...but ew. Going to have to go ahead and agree with this.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 08:07 PM) Then RA Dickey is a power pitcher this year... Danks is somewhere in between. Not a finesse guy, not really a true power pitcher, either. Certainly, at his diminished velocity, he wasn't missing as many bats as before. Any pitcher with a great change-up can strike out a ton of guys. Johan Santana, in his prime, for example. Didn't Santana combine that amazing change with a blazing heater, to the tune of about a 15mph difference?

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 07:34 PM) Ummm does power sinker ring a bell? That was Garland's best pitch. Apparently you associate power with velocity which is a fallacy. If velocity is all you're looking for, Danks tops out at 94 which would put him in the top 20ish% of LH starters. I associate power with the K stat, and overpowering batters which equated to those Ks. IMO, to be a true power pitcher that pitches to K, you need a 1:1 K/IP ratio or better. It's fine if you disagree with my assessment of what a true power pitcher is. Peavy WAS a true power pitcher. Kerry Wood WAS a true power pitcher.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 07:02 PM) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/danksjo01.shtml Answer the question.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 06:59 PM) The argument isn't about how you think he'd be most effective, it's about what he is, power pitcher. Another Sox power pitcher who didn't throw hard, Garland. He's not a power pitcher. And Garland was a sinkerballer. They pitch to contact. That's the point of the sinker.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 06:52 PM) Even with this year, Danks has averaged 7k/9IP over his career. That isn't really "hardly K's anyone". Fine, I may be exaggerating my point, but I still dont see him as a power pitcher...if that stat line you posted is even right...it seems inflated. So tell me, do YOU see him as a power pitcher?!

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:45 PM) Doesn't pitch to contact + tries to K everyone + attempts to overpower bats = power pitcher. There's nothing finesse about Danks approach. But he hardly Ks anyone, so regardless of him wanting to be a power pitcher...he's not. He also overpowers nobody...so what exactly are you talking about here? Peavy WAS a power pitcher, and he's still more of a power pitcher than Danks ever will be. Sale is a power pitcher. Danks is not, regardless of what he tries to be. That shows he's not pitching to his strengths, if anything. That's also saying he believes he's a power pitcher like you do...and you are the first person I've ever known to call him that. His historic stat line also says otherwise. Far less Ks than innings pitched, usually as many or more hits as innings pitched. That != power pitcher. It means he's pitching to contact, if anything.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:03 PM) Danks is not a finesse pitcher. There's a lot more than velocity involved in being a power pitcher. Oh, and a number 3 pitcher with his background doesn't "suck." Where do people come up with this s***? First, yes he is. What he's NOT is a power pitcher...I think you are absolutely wrong on this in every regard. People come up with opinions all of the time, and you don't have to agree with them. But, to elaborate, I think he's been pegged to be a #1 by this organization...and at worst a #2...and most people viewed him as an upcoming #1/#2 at worst. NOT a #3, or a #4. So if he becomes a #3, or a #4, IMO, he's fallen short of expectations. Can he be a serviceable #3/#4...yes. Only I've already said that a number of times.

Here is my honest assessment of Danks...and I seriously hope to be proven wrong on this. He's Mark Buehrle with more power and less control, but a less effective pitcher because even though he can hit the strike zone...he's not hitting it where he wants too. IMO, and I'm not forgetting the injury, I think the league is catching up with him, and after returning from injury he will be a 4-5 ERA pitcher for the rest of his career, a #3 at best...and a #4 at worst. He will be serviceable...but never better than slightly above average, if not just average. In the end, I think he's being paid too much for what he's going to bring this team over the next few years. I hope I'm wrong about this...but I don't think I will be. Feel free to bring it up and make fun of me in a year or two if I'm wrong.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 02:11 PM) We sure of that? Danks was healthy last year and not very good. According to them, he wasn't average last year...he had one bad start. I think Danks was completely average last year...and downright terrible this year. And now while it's convenient to blame the injury...he still went out there and sucked all season until we put him on the DL.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 02:10 PM) Q is not going to be a better pitcher than a healthy John Danks. So far the numbers say otherwise. Do I expect the league to catch up with Q? Yes. Will they? Time will tell. Have they yet? No. And we don't have a healthy John Danks.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 02:05 PM) A 3.82 FIP is not average, especially not in a homerun friendly park like U.S. Cellular Field. Danks has been an above average starter for much of his career and he posted ace-like numbers in 08 and 10. You said he posted an average ERA and an average WHIP. That's average.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 02:06 PM) To think Q is sustainable is crazy. I don't...but until he falls apart who cares?

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 02:05 PM) A #4 starter is a heck of a lot better than what we've gotten from Humber and Axelrod (and Stewart) this year. This is true. I'm not a Danks hater as a few are already appearing to think I am...I just don't think he's as good as people here do.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) You have Sale and Peavy in front of him. What is wrong with getting a 4-4.25 ERA and 1.30 WHIP out of him? And the guy had a 6 era after his start last year. Nothing is wrong with that. But you have Sale, Peavy and Q in front of him right now...he's a #4 on this staff...and NOT the reason we will or will not go to the post season. That's all I'm saying.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:53 PM) He had a league-average WHIP along with a league-average ERA. All of our pitchers had mediocre to bad seasons last year when it came to the surface stats, a lot of that had to do with how bad our defense was. The Sox had a 3.66 FIP as a team last year, good for best in the AL. However, our team ERA was 4.10, 8th in the AL. Say what you want about DIPS theory, but over a sample size of 1500 innings, it should be fairly accurate. And? I called him slightly better than average. His statistics, as you just cited...actually say I'm wrong...and he's NOT better than average...he's merely average.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) It's a private medical issue. I don't care or need to know the details of Kirk's condition, either. How much information is your employer entitled to if you have to go on long-term leave? It's not the extent of the information they're entitled too...it's a professionals word they're entitled too. If you say you have cancer...they're going to want your doctor to say so, etc...and in the end, it better turn out to be an actual diagnosis...not some friend of your making false statements. Jackson cited "Exhaustion", which is fine...but it doesn't take weeks to recover from...it, at best, takes a few days of vacation or rest. We also aren't elected public officials. Not as many people need to know our reasons...so they can be kept more private. But to live a life in the camera eye means you have to give up some of these privacies...or else don't become a public figure. It's a trade off, and they're well compensated for said trade off. Wahhh, I'm famous...people bother me on the street. Yes, wah. You also get single paychecks that equate to more money than some people make in a decade.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) Anything but Quintana would be acceptable from your list. Agreed.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:43 PM) Are you saying even a healthy John Danks sucks? I think it's fairly evident he wasn't healthy this year. The loss of velocity on all his pitches seemed too great, especially for a 27 year old, to be considered as a talent regression. John Danks is one of the top left handed starters in the AL, when healthy. His peripherals last year weren't bad, at least not as bad as his ERA indicated. His WHIP says otherwise. Edit: And no, I don't think Danks sucks...but I don't think he's a #1 or #2, either. He's slightly better than an average starter to me.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 01:40 PM) John Danks was hurt, which was why he had pitched so badly. His career numbers suggest a really good middle of the rotation anchor. Really a #2 or #3 starter who will get you better than the league average ERA, and 30+ starts. Don't let this year's shoulder injury cloud your judgement here. Last years really bad start really muddied his numbers last year. He's a #3 at this point...and I base it not on a single bad start from last year, but from watching him. His slowly rising WHIP, IMO, is a red flag...that tells me, as the finesse pitcher he is with underwhelming speed, that he's losing his control/effectiveness of the strike zone...he's allowing too many runners per inning to reach...and that doesn't appear to be changing. I know it's convenient to blame the injury this year...but to blame one bad start last year? No way. His ERA was into the 4's...and one bad start didn't do that.

Call me crazy...but I'm not of fan of how some of you are giving these politicians excuses for prolonged absence from work without showing/stating an actual reason why. We aren't talking about some perk-less minimum wage job here...we're talking about a very high paying job, with perks the likes of which none of us could even imagine. If I, or anyone on this forum (that I know of) missed work for this long and cited the reason of "exhaustion" or "personal", we'd be in the unemployment line within a week. I'm not saying a person with a legitimate reason cannot miss work for an extended amount of time...but like the rest of us, you need to tell your company/bosses why...and in the case of an elected public official...WE, the people...are his f***ing boss. Another politician taking advantage of his high paying, high powered position.

Why are people acting as if this matters? Injury or not, Danks was -- quite possibly -- the worst pitcher in our rotation. Losing him did not hurt us...probably helped us. If he did come back, would he have returned to form? And if he did, what form ar we talking about? That of last year, or his better years prior to that? His career numbers do not suggest he's a #1 or even a #2, IMO. In either case, who knows, since it doesn't look like he's coming back anytime soon. All we can use is the statistical data we have, and based on last season and this season his WHIP and ERA were on the rise, and his effectiveness as an under powering pitcher were on the fall. He was practically an automatic loss this season unless we got him out of the game early enough. The few starts he had that were quality were few and far between the really bad ones. Let's not pretend the loss of Danks is the reason we need another pitcher...even if he wasn't injured, we'd need another pitcher BECAUSE of him. Practically every team in MLB would want another quality starting pitcher...the loss or gain of Danks wouldn'teit have changed that, either.

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 10:37 AM) there are a lot of morons at sox games, even in the choice sections of the 100 level. Like during cubs/sox, where all these people pay $100 and up for lower deck seats, just to STAND on the outfield concourse. So for a lil more, yeah, I'll go where it's less crowded, and the only choices for watching the game are on tv in the concourse(or bar) or in your seats. The 1% thing was a joke.