http://grantland.com/features/mlb-worst-co...-albert-pujols/

 

7. SP John Danks, Chicago White Sox: three years, $42.75 million (11)

 

Danks made this list last year, and what I said then still applies: If he can return to good health, the rest of his contract could work out fine. It’s hard not to assume the worst, though, after 2012 surgery to “repair capsule tear and rotator cuff and biceps tendon debridement,” followed by a 63-day DL stint last year for inflammation in that same surgically repaired shoulder. Danks did make 22 starts in 2013, but he posted defense-independent results that were no better than those he delivered during the tumultuous period leading up to his surgery.

 

Danks has gone from being one of the best pitchers in the game at age 23 to throwing what we can only hope is something better than batting-practice fodder at age 28. Pitching is a cruel profession. And the White Sox are on the hook for a considerable sum regardless of which Danks surfaces this year.

I mean, yep.

BP really likes Danks to have a decent year. His HR rate was really high. If he can get it back to near normal, they think he's golden.

I've heard from multiple sources that historically, players that have undergone Tommy John surgery have performed much better in their second year back. I'm hoping this is the case, cuz John Danks is the s***

Danks is the guy on the list that has the best chance to earn his money. Most of the players on that list are over 30 and declining. If Danks recovers the way he is expected, his contract will be just fine.

I've heard from multiple sources that historically, players that have undergone Tommy John surgery have performed much better in their second year back. I'm hoping this is the case, cuz John Danks is the s***

 

He had shoulder surgery, not Tommy John. It was a similar surgery to Johan Santana, but it appears he's handled it better.

Danks was weird to watch last year. He would be really good for a few innings and then just get destroyed, then he would regroup for an inning or two and be removed. It seemed like he got tired and then would hang his changeup, which would get tattooed

Danks was weird to watch last year. He would be really good for a few innings and then just get destroyed, then he would regroup for an inning or two and be removed. It seemed like he got tired and then would hang his changeup, which would get tattooed

 

He also didn't go out of the zone very much, and he paid for it. (best ever BB/9 rate by about 50%) Hopefully his fastball comes back this year.

I think 7th worst is a stretch.

Just about every multi year contract in baseball worth over 10 or more million a year is a bad contract. Yet they keep signing 'em up.

Just about every multi year contract in baseball worth over 10 or more million a year is a bad contract. Yet they keep signing 'em up.

 

It's so funny to see you say that contracts over $10 million per are bad contracts, but then also post that we should trade for Buehrle who is set to make $37 million over the next two years. Contradict yourself much?

Just about every multi year contract in baseball except for players who played for Ozzie worth over 10 or more million a year is a bad contract. Yet they keep signing 'em up.

 

FTFY

It's so funny to see you say that contracts over $10 million per are bad contracts, but then also post that we should trade for Buehrle who is set to make $37 million over the next two years. Contradict yourself much?

 

Also worth noting that all offseason he has been saying "SPEND, JERRY, SPEND!"

hard to give any stock to a GRANTLAND article...

It's so funny to see you say that contracts over $10 million per are bad contracts, but then also post that we should trade for Buehrle who is set to make $37 million over the next two years. Contradict yourself much?

 

+1

hard to give any stock to a GRANTLAND article...

Why?

 

And while Danks certainly hasn't lived up to his contract, I think he'll be just fine these next few years.

What did they do recently that has put them in such a negative light? I think they had a scandal of some sorts?

 

They wrote an article that dealt with some transgender issues in a very clumsy way -- and obviously when I say clumsy, many others say it was abhorrent.

It isn't a pretty contract and it is obvious evidence of signing pitchers to long term deals is risky.

It isn't a pretty contract and it is obvious evidence of signing pitchers to long term deals is risky.

 

The thing is, if he pitches anywhere close to pre-injury John Danks, that deal is a steal.

It's so funny to see you say that contracts over $10 million per are bad contracts, but then also post that we should trade for Buehrle who is set to make $37 million over the next two years. Contradict yourself much?

 

In greg's defense, let me say that MB's performance year to year is about as consistent as any player, ever, and while he's probably not worth what he'll make the next two years, he also entails very little risk.

The thing is, if he pitches anywhere close to pre-injury John Danks, that deal is a steal.

 

Somewhere between fair and a steal, imo. If he does regain most of his past abilities, and prospects like Beck appear to be ready soon, we should still deal him when able.

In greg's defense, let me say that MB's performance year to year is about as consistent as any player, ever, and while he's probably not worth what he'll make the next two years, he also entails very little risk.

 

 

Someone once said this about Adam Dunn.

It's so funny to see you say that contracts over $10 million per are bad contracts, but then also post that we should trade for Buehrle who is set to make $37 million over the next two years. Contradict yourself much?

 

Contraditions aside, name any players out there who are worth say 14 million dollars a year over three, four or five years? How many more of these contracts are we going to see when after one year of the multi year deal teams are clamoring to get rid of said players? And yes, as long as teams are paying out the wazoo, I figure my team might as well get in on the fray. Now would I prefer all teams to stop this nonsense en masse? Of course.

 

As far as Mark, if you've got to pay somebody exorbitant money, it might as well be him because I stand by my statement he's a player and he's a coach. He's a GREAT EXAMPLE for all young pitchers and might teach them a thing or two about avoiding the DL (Sale? Nate?).

Edited February 12, 201412 yr by greg775

What we're seeing with Danksy is the other side of long term deals, which is that $15M is worth a very different amount of production by the end of the contract than it is when the deal is inked.

Contraditions aside, name any players out there who are worth say 14 million dollars a year over three, four or five years? How many more of these contracts are we going to see when after one year of the multi year deal teams are clamoring to get rid of said players? And yes, as long as teams are paying out the wazoo, I figure my team might as well get in on the fray. Now would I prefer all teams to stop this nonsense en masse? Of course.

 

As far as Mark, if you've got to pay somebody exorbitant money, it might as well be him because I stand by my statement he's a player and he's a coach. He's a GREAT EXAMPLE for all young pitchers and might teach them a thing or two about avoiding the DL (Sale? Nate?).

 

Alternatively, we can save that money and you know, have Coop and Herm work with Sale and Nate...who have both been just fine.