PDA

View Full Version : Danks & Masset: Killing everyone but the Twins


White City
05-18-2008, 07:54 PM
John and Nick have allowed 26 earned runs in 73 innings so far, a combined 3.21 ERA. Think Texas is regretting that trade?

Wait, it gets better. These guys have been darn near transcendent versus everyone but the Twins. In 7.1 innings versus the Twins, John has given up 9 earned runs; in 8.1 innings for Nick, the Twins scored all of his 9 earned runs.

Versus the Twins, their ERA: 10.34.
Versus the rest of MLB so far: 1.26.

I know, I know -- it's May. But that is simply amazing, especially considering where we would be as a team right now if we were waiting for Brandon to heal from injury and were down a decent arm in the pen. So far, Kenny is a freakin' genius.

TheOldRoman
05-18-2008, 08:09 PM
Strange facts.

I didn't recognize your user name. When I opened this thread, I expected to find the rantings of the latest incarnation of Timberwolf.:D:

SoxGirl4Life
05-18-2008, 08:11 PM
John and Nick have allowed 26 earned runs in 73 innings so far, a combined 3.21 ERA. Think Texas is regretting that trade?

Wait, it gets better. These guys have been darn near transcendent versus everyone but the Twins. In 7.1 innings versus the Twins, John has given up 9 earned runs; in 8.1 innings for Nick, the Twins scored all of his 9 earned runs.

Versus the Twins, their ERA: 10.34.
Versus the rest of MLB so far: 1.26.

I know, I know -- it's May. But that is simply amazing, especially considering where we would be as a team right now if we were waiting for Brandon to heal from injury and were down a decent arm in the pen. So far, Kenny is a freakin' genius.


How much of those ERA's vs the Twins are at the dome?

turners56
05-18-2008, 08:16 PM
How much of those ERA's vs the Twins are at the dome?

Danks has never pitched in the dome this season. Masset gave up 3 runs in the dome in 4 innings. So it's not a good ERA.

TheOldRoman
05-18-2008, 08:17 PM
How much of those ERA's vs the Twins are at the dome?Both of them got shelled at home. In the same game, actually.

White City
05-18-2008, 08:27 PM
Strange facts.

I didn't recognize your user name. When I opened this thread, I expected to find the rantings of the latest incarnation of Timberwolf.:D:

Mostly a lurker over the years, only adding something if it isn't already covered. You guys make a ton of difference for us fans out in the hinterlands, let me tell you. It says that I joined in July 2005, but I've been around for a decade on this board and its previous incarnations (I did a rehab report on Cal Eldred in 2000 when he pitched in Richmond, VA, for instance).

White City is a reference to the Columbian Exposition of 1893. That was a re-imagining of Chicago (and by extension America) as the perfect community and played a large part in launching the concept of American Exceptionalism. I like that because my image of Chicago is similar -- it's a great place to visit (although I only get there a couple of times a decade), and I only think of the great things when I think of the city. So I have my own unrealistic image of your city, hence the username.

I'm just a Carlton Fisk and Harold Baines fan who stayed on as a White Sox fan ever since.

SoxGirl4Life
05-18-2008, 08:30 PM
Both of them got shelled at home. In the same game, actually.


I've blocked that one out--but now that you mention it.. it was the second game at home, I think.

ondafarm
05-18-2008, 11:18 PM
Every once in awhile a team gets a feeling of absolute invincibility and every batter believes they can hit anything thrown up there. I played in a couple of games that got absolutely out of hand, on both sides (giving and receiving.) That was the Twins 13-1 victory I believe.

White City
05-30-2008, 09:12 AM
It's now a 1.39 ERA against everyone but the Twins -- 11 earned runs in 71 1/3 innings.

Danks gets the Royals at the Cell next (probably on June 4th). He would likely pitch the finale of the four-game Twins series on June 9th (unless Ozzie juggles the rotation for some reason, which I would doubt). That would be the last home tilt vs. the Twins this season, barring postseason scenarios.

doublem23
05-30-2008, 09:22 AM
The Quentin deal was a great one, but kind of a no-brainer. Most baseball people knew about TCQ's skills, it was just a question of if he could get healthy. But he was acquired for an A-ball player. When you can acquire a top MLB-ready prospect for a kid in A-ball, you just have to do it, IMO.

But the deal with Texas was gutsy. McCarthy was already a fan favorite, he had shown some flashes of serious MLB talent, and he was able to flip him for Danks and Massett, who both have been more productive at the MLB level since the deal. It was a brilliant move. Maybe as good as the Garcia trade.

areilly
05-30-2008, 09:48 AM
But the deal with Texas was gutsy. McCarthy was already a fan favorite, he had shown some flashes of serious MLB talent, and he was able to flip him for Danks and Massett, who both have been more productive at the MLB level since the deal. It was a brilliant move. Maybe as good as the Garcia trade.

I'm glad Danks and Massett are coming around, but I still would've taken the McCarthy/Fonzie trade that almost happened. Oh well, maybe this year can make up for 2006 in a roundabout way.

jackbrohamer
05-30-2008, 10:31 AM
I've blocked that one out--but now that you mention it.. it was the second game at home, I think.

April 9 at home against the Twinkies. Danks gave up 7 ER in 2.1 innings; Masset gave up 5 ER in 3.2 innings. The stats for both against the Twinkies are skewed due to that one game.

voodoochile
05-30-2008, 10:39 AM
April 9 at home against the Twinkies. Danks gave up 7 ER in 2.1 innings; Masset gave up 5 ER in 3.2 innings. The stats for both against the Twinkies are skewed due to that one game.

And the stats for Masset are even more skewed because he pitched 3 innings of shutout ball before surrendering all 5 runs in his 4th inning of work. The Sox were getting killed anyway, so it's not like it matters.

VeeckAsInWreck
05-30-2008, 10:40 AM
I'm glad Danks and Massett are coming around, but I still would've taken the McCarthy/Fonzie trade that almost happened. Oh well, maybe this year can make up for 2006 in a roundabout way.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Still though, Danks and Massett have been great for us. I was one that didn't understand getting rid of McCarthy but clearly KW and his scouts know what they're doing. :tiphat:

jabrch
05-30-2008, 10:45 AM
The Quentin deal was a great one, but kind of a no-brainer.

A lot of WSI brains were bemoaning the loss of our best offensive prospect...I'm sure some still are - but they just can't do it out loud while CQ is tearing it up.

doublem23
05-30-2008, 10:57 AM
A lot of WSI brains were bemoaning the loss of our best offensive prospect...I'm sure some still are - but they just can't do it out loud while CQ is tearing it up.

Did people think that highly of Carter? I knew he could mash, but I didn't know if his ceiling was that high. Anyways, the D-backs flipped him in the Danny Haren trade, so he's in Oakland's system, now, too and struggling at High-A Stockton (http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=2387), which is apparently where former Sox prospects go to die.

White City
05-30-2008, 11:02 AM
I guess the key to the deal is Masset. We don't know what we have with him yet.

McCarthy and Danks were a wash last year; Danks is having a strong year to date (just get those IP/G up and he's a total stud!) whereas McCarthy is still on the DL with arm trouble. But that could turn around; if Nails comes back, he could have a hot second half while Danks returns to Earth, and then how do you evaluate their relative worth?

But with Masset, he's a JAG in the bullpen so far. If he can develop into a reliable arm in pressure situations (I wouldn't say he has yet, by any means), then Kenny will have a huge steal on his hands.

If the Sox can make the postseason this year on the backs of Scott Linebrink, Carlos Quentin, Gavin Floyd and some combination of Danks/Masset, plus career average performances from Swisher and Cabrera, I don't see how Kenny's peers can diss him in the executive of the year vote. Then again, they did so in 2005, so ...

jabrch
05-30-2008, 11:23 AM
Did people think that highly of Carter?

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=95257



Why are we giving the DBacks our only good position prospects... ugh!

You've gotta be ****ing me

I like this trade much less than I did 10 minutes ago.

I don't like it

I'm running out right now to get my lawn chair set up on LaSalle Street.


I'm not going past the first page...but I am sure there were more and better examples.

JorgeFabregas
05-30-2008, 11:34 AM
Not a big fan of digging through old threads for "I told you so" stuff (in fact, I didn't know what to make of Quentin and I don't think I posted in said thread at all), but some posts in there are good for laughs. Quentin was equated to Luis Terrero at one point at Craig Grebeck was mocked for suggesting that Quentin would be more valuable than Dye at another.

jabrch
05-30-2008, 11:50 AM
Not a big fan of digging through old threads for "I told you so" stuff (in fact, I didn't know what to make of Quentin and I don't think I posted in said thread at all), but some posts in there are good for laughs. Quentin was equated to Luis Terrero at one point at Craig Grebeck was mocked for suggesting that Quentin would be more valuable than Dye at another.

That wasn't "I Told You So" - I can fully admit to doing that on other threads. This was about if there was value being placed on Chris Carter and if folks weren't gung-ho on this move.

In any case Jorge, what's so wrong with holding people responsible for their opinions? If people can go off on a GM, coach, move as good or bad, without seeing how it plays out, shouldn't they be able to account for it 1/3 of a season later?

JorgeFabregas
05-30-2008, 01:27 PM
That wasn't "I Told You So" - I can fully admit to doing that on other threads. This was about if there was value being placed on Chris Carter and if folks weren't gung-ho on this move.

In any case Jorge, what's so wrong with holding people responsible for their opinions? If people can go off on a GM, coach, move as good or bad, without seeing how it plays out, shouldn't they be able to account for it 1/3 of a season later?
Oh, I wasn't accusing you of that--just pointing out that that's not what I was trying to do in bringing up those amusing quotes.

I suppose it's alright in some cases. In a lot of the trade threads fans have instant reactions regarding players they don't know much about. I remember questioning the excitement over the Javy trade at the time, but that has turned out quite well. Generally, I think that fans are held to a lower standard than GMs because they're not forming and expressing their opinions for a living. That doesn't mean that they can't express their opinions, though, or that their opinions aren't sometimes more accurate than the professionals.

eriqjaffe
05-30-2008, 01:37 PM
he's in Oakland's system, now, too and struggling at High-A Stockton (http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=2387), which is apparently where former Sox prospects go to die.Holy moly, just look at how bad his fielding stats are!

In 157 career games at 1B, he has committed 36 errors, equalling Paul Konerko's total from 2001 to today. Talk about a butcher...

jabrch
05-30-2008, 02:01 PM
Oh, I wasn't accusing you of that--just pointing out that that's not what I was trying to do in bringing up those amusing quotes.

I suppose it's alright in some cases. In a lot of the trade threads fans have instant reactions regarding players they don't know much about. I remember questioning the excitement over the Javy trade at the time, but that has turned out quite well. Generally, I think that fans are held to a lower standard than GMs because they're not forming and expressing their opinions for a living. That doesn't mean that they can't express their opinions, though, or that their opinions aren't sometimes more accurate than the professionals.

I'll admit - I do it from time to time...but usually only in extreme cases with people who take such a blatant stance about what are "facts" in their expert eyes which end up being complete fiction...

TDog
05-30-2008, 02:12 PM
Both of them got shelled at home. In the same game, actually.

In both cases the ERAs are skewed and don't reflect how hard they were hit.

Masset, as Voodoo noted, pitched scoreless innings before a big inning. He wouldn't have been out there if the game was closer and the Sox didn't need to save the pen for something other than a lost cause in the April 9 12-5 loss. It was 7-3 when Masset was hit for five runs. Danks started the game and gave up the first seven, two in the first and five in the third. The key was that he came out unable to throw strikes. I didn't see the game, but in the game thread posters were complaining of "typical Twins hits" -- a lot of balls that weren't hit very hard that dropped. I'm sure there were some balls hit well among the seven hits and six outs (one man was picked off for the seventh out), but with men on base via three walks in less than three innings, there was more pitching out of the stretch and more pressure.

Last year Masset gave up a game-ending three-run homer (to Morneau after an intentional walk that was ended up counting as an earned run) in the dome. His career numbers against the Twins are horrid. He came into the season with a 15.88 career ERA in three games against the Twins. But these are young pitchers. I don't believe their lack of success against the Twins predicts limited future success.

When Jake Westbrook was with the Yankees in 2000, his first major league start was against the White Sox. He walked the leadoff man, who came around to score before getting hammered for five runs in the second. Despite the fact that even in 2000 people believed anyone debuting against the White Sox was destined to have a great debut, he left after two with a career ERA of 27. When he started in the 2005 opener for Cleveland, he gave up one run to the White Sox on an infield out, but it was the only run scored on that April afternoon.

Averages are just that. They average in the highs and lows of where a player has been. Often they don't predict what a player will do.

White City
06-10-2008, 09:51 AM
Danks

Versus Twins / Versus Everyone Else
IP: 13.1 / 61.1
ER: 13 / 13
WHIP: 2.18 / 1.08
ERA: 8.78 / 1.91
BB-KK: 8-11 / 15-44
Quality Starts: 0-for-3 / 7-for-10

Masset

Versus Twins / Versus Everyone Else
IP: 9.1 / 17.0
ER:10 / 1
WHIP: 2.36 / 1.06
ERA: 9.64 / 0.53
BB-KK: 6-9 / 9-15

Both of them had performances against the Twins that were consistent with their YTD numbers going into this latest series.

Luckily, the Sox don't have many more games left with the Twins. Of course, the performance of these two guys against the rest of the league can't hold up (can it?). But it remains an amazing statistical anomaly.

One thing of slight concern regarding Danks: He has failed to record a quality start in three of his last four appearances. But the Sox were still 2-1 in those games (the sole loss was the 2-0 stinker to Joe Saunders and the LAAA).

Nick will get more appearances as a situational pitcher than he did with mop-up duty. So the jury is still out on what the anomaly is: His Twins performance, or his performance against everyone else.

JB98
06-10-2008, 01:45 PM
Every once in awhile a team gets a feeling of absolute invincibility and every batter believes they can hit anything thrown up there. I played in a couple of games that got absolutely out of hand, on both sides (giving and receiving.) That was the Twins 13-1 victory I believe.

Actually, it was Buehrle and Wassermann who got the crap kicked out of them in that 13-1 debacle.

TDog
06-10-2008, 05:45 PM
Actually, it was Buehrle and Wassermann who got the crap kicked out of them in that 13-1 debacle.

Wasserman was supposed to finish the game to save the bullpen, but gave up eight runs with the Twins mostly swinging at the first pitch.

Danks' first start against the Twins resulted in a 12-5 loss in which he gave up five in the third after giving up two in the first and Masset, in his fourth inning of work, gave up five in the sixth. MacDougal, coming in to save the bullpen, retired the side i order in the ninth, striking out Punto. Matt Thornton pitched two scoreless innings, allowing only a walk and struck out four.

The next day's game was postponed and the Sox didn't play again until Detroit came into town and beat Contreras. The Twins game was rescheduled for a day when the White Sox were more in the mood for kicking Twins butt.