PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's Off the wall Rumor Mill: M's should trade for Danks


SkeetSkeetAmit
10-27-2009, 01:38 PM
Under MLB Rumor Mill on ESPN Insider: "Cameron suggests trading Brandon Morrow (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28734) for J.J. Hardy (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5908), re-signing Russell Branyan (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3988), trading for John Danks (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28508), inking Orlando Hudson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5029) and Nick Johnson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4240), and taking a flyer on Ben Sheets (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4571).

First off, why would we trade Danks?

Second, what could the M's want to trade for him to make it worthwhile?

khan
10-27-2009, 01:42 PM
Under MLB Rumor Mill on ESPN Insider:

You should've stopped reading right there.

Rocky Soprano
10-27-2009, 01:46 PM
The thread title is misleading. It seems like you are saying there are rumors that they traded for him already instead of some suggestion.

Boondock Saint
10-27-2009, 01:47 PM
The title of the thread scared the crap out of me. It sounds as if it had already been completed.

edit: Rocky beat me to it.

Craig Grebeck
10-27-2009, 01:49 PM
1. Change the thread title.
2. This was Dave Cameron's totally hypothetical offseason plan he posted at his blog U.S.S. Mariner.
3. The proposed Danks swap has been panned by various Sox bloggers in the last week or so.

MrX
10-27-2009, 01:59 PM
Here's his idea

Trade Jose Lopez, Mark Lowe, and Jason Vargas to Chicago for John Danks

He says that's trading low on Lopez and his rationale for why the Sox would do it is because Danks is arbitration eligible.

http://ussmariner.com/2009/10/20/daves-2010-off-season-plan/

thomas35forever
10-27-2009, 02:33 PM
Why do all of these idiots in the media think we're willing to break up our rotation? We have a plan for the next few years, and trading one of our starting pitchers would break it.

soltrain21
10-27-2009, 02:52 PM
Why do all of these idiots in the media think we're willing to break up our rotation? We have a plan for the next few years, and trading one of our starting pitchers would break it.

I'd trade one of our starters if the right deal came around. Nobody is untouchable.

spawn
10-27-2009, 02:59 PM
Why do all of these idiots in the media think we're willing to break up our rotation? We have a plan for the next few years, and trading one of our starting pitchers would break it.
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.

JermaineDye05
10-27-2009, 03:12 PM
Under MLB Rumor Mill on ESPN Insider: "Cameron suggests trading Brandon Morrow (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28734) for J.J. Hardy (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5908), re-signing Russell Branyan (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3988), trading for John Danks (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28508), inking Orlando Hudson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5029) and Nick Johnson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4240), and taking a flyer on Ben Sheets (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4571).

First off, why would we trade Danks?

Second, what could the M's want to trade for him to make it worthwhile?

King Felix.

kittle42
10-27-2009, 03:48 PM
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.

Amen to that.

Rocky Soprano
10-27-2009, 04:02 PM
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.

So true!

Boondock Saint
10-27-2009, 04:22 PM
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.

That's very true, but the people on here aren't paid to be "MLB analysts".

Bucky F. Dent
10-27-2009, 04:33 PM
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.


No. The sad thing is that the supposedly reputable national news organization, ESPN, floats trade rumors as crazy as the rumors that get floated around here.

Edit - Boondock beat me to it!

doublem23
10-27-2009, 04:37 PM
I'd trade one of our starters if the right deal came around. Nobody is untouchable.

Yeah! Who needs 5 starters?

spawn
10-27-2009, 04:44 PM
That's very true, but the people on here aren't paid to be "MLB analysts".
Dave Cameron isn't a paid MLB analyst...at least not by ESPN.

guillensdisciple
10-27-2009, 05:25 PM
I 100 percent believe that John Danks will be a top of the rotation starter either next year or the year after it.

Same goes for Gavin.
The White Sox have a rotation with 4 potential number one starters for other teams. Why in hell would anyone want to split that up? I don't care who we get back (unless it is a batting champ or another number one), there should be no reason to break this up.

The White Sox are setting themselves up for the best rotation in Baseball, yep, not just in the A.L but in baseball. I don't see why Kenny should move his finger with the pitching staff. Also, with the emergence of Dan Hudson, we have another potential superstar coming from within the organization.

In a couple of years, we might be looking at the best staff in White Sox history with 5 potential number one starters. From what I have seen of Hudson, that is possible.

So, why trade? Why even think about it? Kenny is an absolute genius. A little fix in this hitting, and we might have what we have been waiting for so long: a period of White Sox domination. Something along the lines of what the Red Sox have been doing this decade.

It's possible, and we have established the most important tool to achieve it.

Kenny, address the hitting and the closers role, and you will have one of the greatest White Sox squads to ever hit any baseball field.

Damn, I am getting excited.

Goodman6
10-27-2009, 07:43 PM
I
In a couple of years, we might be looking at the best staff in White Sox history with 5 potential number one starters. From what I have seen of Hudson, that is possible.



I hope you are right, but saying this might be the best rotation in Sox history is a bit of a stretch. This rotation probably won't be the best Sox rotation in my life time.
Check out the Sox starting pitchers in 1963 & 1964:

For example, here is 1963:

Gary Peters 2.33 ERA, 13 CGs, 4 shutouts
Juan Pizarro 2.39 ERA, 10 CGs, 3 shutouts
Ray Herbert 3.24 ERA, 14 CGs, 7 shutouts
John Buzhardt 2.42 ERA, 6 CGs, 3 shutouts
Joel Horlen 3.27 ERA, 3 CG's 0 shutouts*

* Horlen's numbers were outstanding in 1964 - 1.88 ERA, 9 CG's, 2 shutouts.

Peters, Pizarro and Buzhardt had similar years in 1964 as well.

I know the game has changed from 1963 until now, but that was the best Sox starting rotation in my lifetime. The Sox didn't have a very good offense those years but when those pitchers got a lead and with Hoyt Wilhelm & Eddie Fisher in the bullpen, the Sox won. Those pitchers didn't make a habit of giving up runs the very next half inning after the Sox scored, like the Sox current rotation. If our rotation in 2010 or 2011 can even come close to putting up those kind of numbers, we will all be buying playoff tickets. The 1963 - 64 White Sox had one major problem; that being the New York Yankees. The 1964 team won 98 games and lost out to the Yankees by 1 game.

Tragg
10-27-2009, 07:56 PM
Under MLB Rumor Mill on ESPN Insider: "Cameron suggests trading Brandon Morrow (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28734) for J.J. Hardy (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5908), re-signing Russell Branyan (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=3988), trading for John Danks (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=28508), inking Orlando Hudson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5029) and Nick Johnson (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4240), and taking a flyer on Ben Sheets (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4571).

First off, why would we trade Danks?

Second, what could the M's want to trade for him to make it worthwhile?

Third, who the he'll is Cameron?

Craig Grebeck
10-27-2009, 08:00 PM
Third, who the he'll is Cameron?
Cameron is a writer for Fangraphs and keeps one of the best baseball blogs on the web in U.S.S. Mariner (though they've taken a step back with this abhorrent idea).

Tragg
10-27-2009, 10:26 PM
Cameron is a writer for Fangraphs and keeps one of the best baseball blogs on the web in U.S.S. Mariner (though they've taken a step back with this abhorrent idea).
Exactly -this is the idea of a Mariners fan. Nothing like truth in advertising.

I've read his blog...most of the blogs in that venue are pretty good: southside sox, viva el birdos, etc.

oeo
10-27-2009, 10:32 PM
I'd trade one of our starters if the right deal came around. Nobody is untouchable.

If by 'right deal' you mean an absolute heist, then yes. Otherwise, Danks should not even be discussed.

Lip Man 1
10-27-2009, 11:17 PM
Goodman:

Actually the best time period for Sox pitching other than the years during the deadball era was the time period from 1963 through 1967.

If memory serves they led the league in team ERA in four of those five years and the year they didn't they finished second a very small percentage point behind Baltimore.

Also regarding the bullpen in addition to Wilhelm and Fisher the Sox had Bob Locker, Wilbur Wood, Don Mossi and Don McMahon an absolutely light-s out killer pitching staff.

Go to the WSI interviews and read the ones for Horlen, Peters, Hebert and Wood.

Those were the days.

Lip

Noneck
10-28-2009, 12:19 AM
Lip,

And if there were Divsions and playoffs as there are today, the Sox and their pitching staff would have been a team to be reckoned with during that period.

soxnut1018
10-28-2009, 01:18 AM
Dewayne Wise and John Danks for King Felix and Ichiro?

white sox bill
10-28-2009, 07:24 AM
The sad thing is their trade ideas aren't any crazier or dumber than a lot of the trade ideas that have floated around here.

You mean trading Linebrink for Ellsbury is dumb?

Tragg
10-28-2009, 09:10 AM
Dewayne Wise and John Danks for King Felix and Ichiro?

Unfortunately, we no longer have contractual rights to Wise. DARN!

Lip Man 1
10-28-2009, 12:17 PM
Noneck:

I already broke this down a few years ago. had their been a two division setup in the 1950's and 1960's the Sox would have made the postseason six times (including 1959) with a stretch of three straight from 1963 through 1965.

Lip

Noneck
10-28-2009, 01:50 PM
Noneck:

I already broke this down a few years ago. had their been a two division setup in the 1950's and 1960's the Sox would have made the postseason six times (including 1959) with a stretch of three straight from 1963 through 1965.

Lip

Lip,

And once they are in the playoffs with that rotation and relief staff, well I think it would have happened. Oh well, If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we would all have.

Goodman6
10-28-2009, 03:07 PM
Goodman:

Actually the best time period for Sox pitching other than the years during the deadball era was the time period from 1963 through 1967.

If memory serves they led the league in team ERA in four of those five years and the year they didn't they finished second a very small percentage point behind Baltimore.

Also regarding the bullpen in addition to Wilhelm and Fisher the Sox had Bob Locker, Wilbur Wood, Don Mossi and Don McMahon an absolutely light-s out killer pitching staff.

Go to the WSI interviews and read the ones for Horlen, Peters, Hebert and Wood.

Those were the days.

Lip

Lip:

I remember going to Sox games either with my dad or my friends from 1963 - 67. As soon as the Sox took a 1-run lead, I just knew that would win. I realize baseball was different then as there were no DH's and the pitching mound was higher giving the pitchers more of an advantage. But those pitching staffs from 1963 - 67 were nothing short of being outstanding. Don't forget that in 1965 the Sox made a trade with Cleveland and added a kid by the name of Tommy John to that great staff as well.

I agree those were the days.

Zisk77
10-28-2009, 06:53 PM
And if the sox were in the American league East in 1983 and 1990 they would probably have been playing in the world series.

PennStater98r
11-05-2009, 02:59 PM
I hope you are right, but saying this might be the best rotation in Sox history is a bit of a stretch. This rotation probably won't be the best Sox rotation in my life time.
Check out the Sox starting pitchers in 1963 & 1964:

For example, here is 1963:

Gary Peters 2.33 ERA, 13 CGs, 4 shutouts
Juan Pizarro 2.39 ERA, 10 CGs, 3 shutouts
Ray Herbert 3.24 ERA, 14 CGs, 7 shutouts
John Buzhardt 2.42 ERA, 6 CGs, 3 shutouts
Joel Horlen 3.27 ERA, 3 CG's 0 shutouts*

* Horlen's numbers were outstanding in 1964 - 1.88 ERA, 9 CG's, 2 shutouts.

Peters, Pizarro and Buzhardt had similar years in 1964 as well.



'63? '64? Try 1917:

Eddie Cicotte 1.53 ERA, 29 CG, 7 Shutouts, ERA+ 174
Red Faber 1.92 ERA, 16 CG, 3 Shutouts, ERA+ 138
Lefty Williams 2.97 ERA, 8 CG, 1 Shutout ERA+ 89 (what a bum :smile:)
Reb Russell 1.95 ERA, 11 CG, 5 Shutouts, ERA+ 137

Four man rotation back then - oh and all of them had some relief appearances and a save or four.

Best in our life time you say? Let's see those more recent World Series Champs:

Mark Buehrle 3.12 ERA, ERA+ 144
Freddy Garcia 3.87 ERA, ERA+ 116
Jon Garland 3.50 ERA, ERA+ 128
Jose Contreras 3.61 ERA, ERA+ 125
Orlando Hernandez 5.12 ERA, ERA+ 88 (McCarthy starts 11 games with 4.03 ERA, ERA+ 111)

The team worst rotation spot - the number 5 probably had an ERA+ of around 94 or 95 - pretty good starters relative to the rest of the league.

Though Peters, Pizarro and Buzhardt all had ERA+ better than 140 in '63 and Horlen's was over 180 in '64. Still - I think you have to measure this relative to the league they played in.