Anyone in here beginning to rethink the notions of a) Danks being a mid-level starting pitcher and b) getting salary relief for him would not be a good thing?

 

But but but quality starts, brah. Quality starts.

Anyone in here beginning to rethink the notions of a) Danks being a mid-level starting pitcher and b) getting salary relief for him would not be a good thing?

 

No.

 

 

No.

Out of the 96 qualified starting pitchers in the MLB, roughly where would you place him?

Anyone in here beginning to rethink the notions of a) Danks being a mid-level starting pitcher and b) getting salary relief for him would not be a good thing?

 

Have you ever tried pulled crow mixed with some KC Masterpiece BBQ top with melted gouda?? It's actually quite tasty.

John Danks is probably #76 out of 150 right now, out of all MLB SPs.

 

Just average - with a tendency to be very good or very bad.

Starting pitchers are inconsistent year over year. Danks has dealt with injuries. Sox have no payroll commitments. I'll roll with Danks to see if he can increase his value to us and on the trade market.

Out of the 96 qualified starting pitchers in the MLB, roughly where would you place him?

Not high, but just to go against the snowballing hatred around here, just BEING one of the 96 qualified starting pitchers - and above replacement level - is something.

John Danks is probably #76 out of 150 right now, out of all MLB SPs.

 

Just average - with a tendency to be very good or very bad.

 

Right there.

 

He is not a complete disaster and has some value and it will cost the Sox to replace him in the off-season. I would rank his production level higher than anyone in the organization behind him. Maybe once Rodon or one of the RHP's develop into at least replacement level players, then you can think about moving Danks to clear out salary. The reality is that he is an average pitcher which does have some level of value.

Right there.

 

He is not a complete disaster and has some value and it will cost the Sox to replace him in the off-season. I would rank his production level higher than anyone in the organization behind him. Maybe once Rodon or one of the RHP's develop into at least replacement level players, then you can think about moving Danks to clear out salary. The reality is that he is an average pitcher which does have some level of value.

At a point during this season, he was in the 40s, but he's regressed again.

Danks would have been average in 2006. In this day and age, a starter with an ERA/FIP in the mid 4s is not considered average anymore.

Not getting any responses so I assume it's busy. But no info.

 

Well, I don't know what all the busy was where you were, but it didn't seem to produce anything.

Well, I don't know what all the busy was where you were, but it didn't seem to produce anything.

I bet that means that they werent trying to do anything. Results=effort right?

Edited July 31, 201411 yr by RockRaines

I bet that means that they werent trying to do anything. Results=effort right?

 

Not at all what I said.

I bet that means that they werent trying to do anything. Results=effort right?

 

They didn't need to move him. If they weren't getting the right value - and they weren't asking for a lot (I wasn't in there and I know that, I can read between the lines) - there's no need to move him. This is exactly what Eminor has mentioned on a few different occasions. The value Danks represents is less than his contract, so the Sox would have to pick up money just to move him. He's not worthless though, as he's a viable option at the back end of the rotation. Still, no team is going to give up a very good piece for Danks.

 

Thus, you're basically asking yourself: is it better to keep John Danks at $14 million for the next 2 years and have him act as a back of the rotation starter, eating innings for the Sox, or include $8-10 million (thus only saying somewhere around $22-24 million), needing to bring in another back of the rotation starter, and getting little to no value for John Danks?

 

The answer to the question is that Danks is worth much more to the White Sox and it's better to keep him at $14 mill.

They didn't need to move him. If they weren't getting the right value - and they weren't asking for a lot (I wasn't in there and I know that, I can read between the lines) - there's no need to move him. This is exactly what Eminor has mentioned on a few different occasions. The value Danks represents is less than his contract, so the Sox would have to pick up money just to move him. He's not worthless though, as he's a viable option at the back end of the rotation. Still, no team is going to give up a very good piece for Danks.

 

Thus, you're basically asking yourself: is it better to keep John Danks at $14 million for the next 2 years and have him act as a back of the rotation starter, eating innings for the Sox, or include $8-10 million (thus only saying somewhere around $22-24 million), needing to bring in another back of the rotation starter, and getting little to no value for John Danks?

 

The answer to the question is that Danks is worth much more to the White Sox and it's better to keep him at $14 mill.

 

This is a real good post, and exactly how Rick Hahn has to be thinking. Should he have moved Danks if he got a good offer? Yes. Did he have to move him? Absolutely not. With the payroll flexibility that they have, there is no reason for the Sox to force a deal just for the sake of making a deal. Bring Danks back, you can still deal him over the winter, when all teams would have a chance to bid on him. You can also hope for improvement over the winter, and see if as his contract bleeds away, that another team might have interest. With the low payroll, the Sox have room to store his deal.

They didn't need to move him. If they weren't getting the right value - and they weren't asking for a lot (I wasn't in there and I know that, I can read between the lines) - there's no need to move him. This is exactly what Eminor has mentioned on a few different occasions. The value Danks represents is less than his contract, so the Sox would have to pick up money just to move him. He's not worthless though, as he's a viable option at the back end of the rotation. Still, no team is going to give up a very good piece for Danks.

 

Thus, you're basically asking yourself: is it better to keep John Danks at $14 million for the next 2 years and have him act as a back of the rotation starter, eating innings for the Sox, or include $8-10 million (thus only saying somewhere around $22-24 million), needing to bring in another back of the rotation starter, and getting little to no value for John Danks?

 

The answer to the question is that Danks is worth much more to the White Sox and it's better to keep him at $14 mill.

Danks will cost the Sox roughtly 28.5 million for the next 2 years. If they could have gotten rid of the contract for that $8-$10 million and gotten some value in return, yes they should have taken it. At this point, given that the deadline has passed, I hope they still move him to relieve $20 million of salary over 2 years and to heck with the value in return. That money can be better spent elsewhere.

 

The Sox can live with Noesi as 5th starter.

Edited July 31, 201411 yr by GreenSox

This is a real good post, and exactly how Rick Hahn has to be thinking. Should he have moved Danks if he got a good offer? Yes. Did he have to move him? Absolutely not. With the payroll flexibility that they have, there is no reason for the Sox to force a deal just for the sake of making a deal. Bring Danks back, you can still deal him over the winter, when all teams would have a chance to bid on him. You can also hope for improvement over the winter, and see if as his contract bleeds away, that another team might have interest. With the low payroll, the Sox have room to store his deal.

 

I agree also except you left out one scenario. Danks tanks the rest of this year so the Sox are stuck w him even as a back of rotation guy w little value. Time will tell.

 

I agree also except you left out one scenario. Danks tanks the rest of this year so the Sox are stuck w him even as a back of rotation guy w little value. Time will tell.

 

Then they get nothing out of him, just like they were going to get now. If they could have gotten something for him, he wouldn't be here.

Danks will cost the Sox roughtly 28.5 million for the next 2 years. If they could have gotten rid of the contract for that $8-$10 million and gotten some value in return, yes they should have taken it. At this point, given that the deadline has passed, I hope they still move him to relieve $20 million of salary over 2 years and to heck with the value in return. That money can be better spent elsewhere.

 

The Sox can live with Noesi as 5th starter.

 

Noesi is currently the 4th starter. That's your problem. You give Danks away and Noesi is now your #3 starter, and suddenly any small chance you have at competing this year (it's still like 4%, but they're a 14-6 run away from being in the thick of things, but I'm not counting on that) evaporates as you're going with Rienzo, Paulino, Wang, or someone of the like as a fallback option. Beyond that, if you free up that money for Danks, you still have to replace him in the rotation. That is either via trade (giving up pieces plus taking on salary), free agency (anybody you sign is gong to be inferior or more expensive than Danks), or waiver wire and minor league free agents (who are not good).

 

Danks is approximately a 2 WAR pitcher. Who are you going to realistically acquire as a 2 WAR pitcher for $20 million over 2 years?

I'm ok with Danks. He gives you a chance to win. Take him out and this rotation sucks more.

Then they get nothing out of him, just like they were going to get now. If they could have gotten something for him, he wouldn't be here.

 

You don't know that. Maybe the "something" they could have gotten for him was less than what Hahn wanted. With the movement of pitchers today, it is reasonable to think hahn got offers but wanted more. Hopefully Danks can contribute in the rotation next year.

I'm ok with Danks. He gives you a chance to win. Take him out and this rotation sucks more.

 

Yea, if by "chance to win" you mean "when you score 5 or more runs!"

 

The point many are making is that John is still a 1 to 2 WAR pitcher, which is better than a turd. But there is no rush to move him. I'm more disappointed that there is seemingly no market for Beckham or Viciedo. Dunn remains to be seen.

Edited August 1, 201411 yr by chitownsportsfan

You don't know that. Maybe the "something" they could have gotten for him was less than what Hahn wanted. With the movement of pitchers today, it is reasonable to think hahn got offers but wanted more. Hopefully Danks can contribute in the rotation next year.

 

So you feed me, "you don't know that" but then go on to speculate about what Hahn was thinking? Um, ok.

I blame Keppinger for this. After him, now every poster thinks the Sox should DFA every single guy they don't like.

Danks is approximately a 2 WAR pitcher. Who are you going to realistically acquire as a 2 WAR pitcher for $20 million over 2 years?

He's nowhere close to a 2 WAR pitcher. He is closer to a .5 WAR pitcher, which is the issue: we're paying 15 mill a year for a 5th starter. Yes, the rotation will be hurting this year without him; it's hurting with him. It will be hurting next year.

That's the problem - there is no starting pitching depth anywhere in this organization.