Did John Danks kick your dog or something? Snubbed an autograph request?

 

EJ quality starts- 5

Danks-14 (in 1 less start btw)

Great post. There's nothing wrong with Danks right now.

I'll take the horseshoe over Jackson anytime.

 

So your solution is bring a guy back that we couldn't wait to show the door? Just plain dumb.

 

I'm not against getting rid of Danks, but the point is to improve which Jackson does not do.

 

I've provided my stats. I rest my case.

 

Calling me dumb doesn't make you convincing.

I've provided my stats. I rest my case.

 

Calling me dumb doesn't make you convincing.

No, I said the idea of trading Danks so the Sox can pick up Jackson is dumb. Nice try at playing the victim though.

EJax did pretty well here under Coop & we need another righty.

 

So here's my crazy 3-way trade idea:

 

Sox send out Danks and Beckham to the Yankees, take back Edwin Jackson from the Cubs

 

Cubs send us a good prospect and a RP or something to dump Jackson's salary

 

The Yankees send us Murphy and a low level arm

 

We send a fairly insignificant piece back to the Cubs for PR reasons/effect (i.e. the formula of the typical salary dump deal, you get your Brandon Hynick and you act like you are happy about it)

 

So in summation: we basically swap Danks for EJax and pick up prospects.... does this work? It seems like EJax has very little trade value and the Cubs want to dump him, whereas Danks may have some little bit of trade value and we do not have to dump him. So we just swap the 2 contracts and get prospects for doing so, and balance the L-R part of our rotation in anticipation of Rodon.

 

 

No

 

EJ in a Sox uniform again HELL NO!

No, I said the idea of trading Danks so the Sox can pick up Jackson is dumb. Nice try at playing the victim though.

 

I'm still waiting for your counter argument.

I'm still waiting for your counter argument.

So you want me to reiterate what's been said by others and myself over the last three pages?

So you want me to reiterate what's been said by others and myself over the last three pages?

 

John Danks is good because he is good and he pitches real good and he's a White Sox so he's good?

I haven't watched Jackson at all this year, so I have no idea if this is bad luck or bad command. Given that he's been doing this for a year and a half, I'm going to fall on the side of bad command.

 

He still has a lot of zip on his fastball and I'm sure his secondary pitches are still decent too, but just like our friends Felipe Paulino and Javier Vazquez, if his command is garbage, his ERA and other numbers will outweigh his peripherals.

I think that Edwin is what he is, a tremendously talented (overpaid) tease. He has been on a lot of staffs in his young career and the results have mostly stayed the same, which is consistent wildl flashes of brilliance and awful.

Completely independent of his results elsewhere, Edwin killed it here. FIP just over 3. I'd take him in our rotation again.

Jackson was good the first 1/2 year we had him. He wasn't very good the next year. And since that 1/2 year, he's been not very good except for his year with the Nationals. Retreading these guys and hoping for deja vu is pointless. And of course the trade that brought him here in the first place was ridiculous on every level.

Move Danks.

But get some young talent, please.

Edited July 22, 201411 yr by GreenSox

I could not care less about Edwin Jackson's W-L record. We all know the Cubs' offense is beyond pathetic. But when I look at Jackson's 5.61 ERA, in the National League yet, I say NO, PLEASE NO!

 

SMO

Edited July 22, 201411 yr by StillMissOzzie

I could not care less about Edwin Jackson's W-L record. We all know the Cubs' offense is beyond pathetic. But when I look at Jackson's 5.61 ERA, in the National League yet, I say NO, PLEASE NO!

 

SMO

Ya I'm not comparing but Sale lost 14 games last year. Still no way on Jax and his contract.

Jackson was good the first 1/2 year we had him. He wasn't very good the next year. And since that 1/2 year, he's been not very good except for his year with the Nationals. Retreading these guys and hoping for deja vu is pointless. And of course the trade that brought him here in the first place was ridiculous on every level.

Move Danks.

But get some young talent, please.

 

He was perfectly fine the second year he was he here. Please check again.

I've provided my stats. I rest my case.

 

Calling me dumb doesn't make you convincing.

Your stats didnt support your argument, THAT is dumb

EJax was really good when he was a White Sox. And Paul Konerko was an all star calibur player at that time. Time has a way of changing things.

 

I see zero reason to acquire Edwin Jackson.

Jackson would make sense if we were trying to dump a bad contract ourselves, but that isn't really the case. Unless the Cubs want to package up a Bernstein type deal where they pay us a top prospect along with taking on Jackson, I see no good reason to do this.

Your stats didnt support your argument, THAT is dumb

 

If you do not understand FIP, I don't know what to tell you.

If you do not understand FIP, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Edwin Jackson has a 4.27 FIP and another $25 million owed to him.

 

His fastball velocity is down 2 full mph since leaving the Sox. That screams declining stuff, and a bad contract to me.

If you do not understand FIP, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Do you understand FIP?

All I know is I hate FIP.

 

Can't I just enjoy John Danks and his 70% quality start percentage without hearing how lucky he's been.

Do you understand FIP?

 

That's an.......interesting question.

 

You seem like a brilliant man. I can't wait to hear you explain it. Do you have a youtube clip of your lecture series?

Edwin Jackson has a 4.27 FIP and another $25 million owed to him.

 

His fastball velocity is down 2 full mph since leaving the Sox. That screams declining stuff, and a bad contract to me.

 

I never said Edwin had a good contract or that he's a good pitcher. He isn't. All I am saying is that he is a better pitcher and has a better contract than Danks. Admittedly, that's not saying much.

That's an.......interesting question.

 

You seem like a brilliant man. I can't wait to hear you explain it. Do you have a youtube clip of your lecture series?

 

It's fielding independent pitching. As such, it tries to characterize the performance of a pitcher based on peripherals, how a pitcher "should, theoretically, be pitching." It is not exact.

 

When considering future performance, I like to look at FIP and xFIP, but it should be taken with a grain of salt. Typically, FIP will be more consistent over time and provide a more accurate portrayal, but there are also times when it's consistency is it's downfall as it does have a tendency to be less extreme. In the instance of Edwin Jackson, it's hard to believe that he would improve much based on his numbers over the last year and a half, considering how poor it's been this year while his xFIP continues to trend upwards.

 

It should also be taken into context with ERA. Simply saying "player's FIP and xFIP are this" doesn't really tell me a whole lot.

 

Put this way, if you had 1 game to start, and you had to choose Tyler Skaggs or Hiroki Kuroda, who would you choose?