BA's take on McCarthy/Danks

[Damen]

In the wake of Uribe's court appearance, which may have him sitting out the 2007 season, here's a somewhat depressing analysis of the McCarthy/Danks trade by Baseball America's Jim Callis.

 

In actuality, McCarthy and Danks are very similar. They both throw two-seam and four-seam fastballs and top out at 93-94 mph, they both have good curveballs and they both have made a lot of progress with changeups. McCarthy has a slightly better curve, while Danks has a slightly better changeup. Their command and control are about the same.

 

There seems to be a perception that McCarthy is a can't-miss guy, perhaps fueled by his spectacular minor league numbers (37-21, 3.38, 536-92 K-BB ratio in 471 IP). But his stuff isn't overwhelming and he has been inconsistent in the majors, as is the case with most young pitchers. I think they're both No. 3 starters. If I had my pick, I'd take Danks because he's two years younger (21 vs. 23) and he's lefthanded.

 

However, because McCarthy has spent parts of the last two seasons getting acclimated to the majors, he's a better bet to make a contribution at that level in 2007 and 2008 than Danks, who has yet to make his big league debut. So the trade is more likely to help the Rangers in the short term. The White Sox seem to be straddling the fence between trying to win now while also building for the future, and that usually doesn't work out well on either end.

 

Since we originally ran our White Sox Top 10, Chicago has acquired six young pitchers: Gio Gonzalez and Gavin Floyd (in the Freddy Garcia deal with the Phillies); Andy Sisco (for Ross Gload from the Royals); and Danks, Nick Masset and Jacob Rasner in the McCarthy trade. Floyd and Sisco have too many big league innings to qualify as prospects.

 

We inserted Gonzalez as the White Sox' No. 3 prospect in the Handbook, but the McCarthy/Danks deal happened too late to be included. If it had occurred in time, I would have lined up the Chicago Top 10 like this:

 

1. Ryan Sweeney, of

2. Josh Fields, 3b

3. John Danks, lhp

4. Gio Gonzalez, lhp

5. Lance Broadway, rhp

6. Kyle McCulloch, rhp

7. Charlie Haeger, rhp

8. Nick Masset, rhp

9. Aaron Cunningham, of

10. Adam Russell, rhp

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/askba/263050.html

[ZoomSlowik]

I can't remember the last time I saw Brian even hit 92 on the gun...

[bigruss]

Haeger is def underrated, with some more work and training he could turn into a very dependable pitcher who has a chance to rack up a ton of wins, I would almost rather see him than Floyd in our rotation next year, but i do worry about Hall and AJ dealing with the knuckler

[Iwritecode]

I can't remember the last time I saw Brian even hit 92 on the gun...

 

Brian?

[maggsmaggs]

I can't remember the last time I saw Brian even hit 92 on the gun...

 

probably his freshman year of college when he was a reliever at Arizona

[striker]

How is this depressing? We get two pitchers for one, one of which is just as good as the one we got rid of. That sounds good to me.

[G&T]

This article is similar to what Steve Stone said about the deal. BMac and Danks might be basically the same guy, but a lefty is more valuable than a righty. Stone also pointed out that Danks has a better fastball with movement, and that BMac might have to change arm angles to get that movement. In fact, he speculated that BMac might have been moved because he would not listen to Coop and he kept getting lit up.

 

What makes me nervous about what this guy says is that teams that try to rebuild and stay competitive do neither. I'm interested to see how that works out. The Yankees look like they are trying to do the same thing.

[Damen]

How is this depressing? We get two pitchers for one, one of which is just as good as the one we got rid of. That sounds good to me.

 

 

If we were going for the higher ceiling Danks, then I grudgingly agree with the trade. However, if Danks is due to be no more than a lefthanded version of McCarthy, I don't quite see the point. We're sacrificing our rotation in 2007 for what, exactly?

[heirdog]

If we were going for the higher ceiling Danks, then I grudgingly agree with the trade. However, if Danks is due to be no more than a lefthanded version of McCarthy, I don't quite see the point. We're sacrificing our rotation in 2007 for what, exactly?

 

To give Gavin Floyd the opportunity to work out his kinks and be the 5th starter and add a power arm to the bullpen in Massett. Danks may help in the future and possibly have a higher ceiling but even if he is just McCarthy, he is a lefty on a team that currently boasts only one lefty, who will likely walk after the season.

 

Floyd, for all his faults, keeps the ball down better than McCarthy and has some movement (sink) on his fastball. However, if you expected McCarthy to win 18 games and have a sub 3.20 ERA this year, then you will be disappointed in the results from our 5th starter this year. If you are realistic and expected 12-14 wins and a sub 4.80 ERA, then you might be satisfied. Its one thing to look back on McCarthy's run in the second call-up in 2005 and feel like we gave up a stud ace but that would be a mistake, just like writing him off for last year's woes out of the bullpen would be. The truth is somewhere in the middle and with his stuff, McCarthy would probably do a fine job winning a good amount of games for a team that has an offense to support most pitchers while still giving up a bunch of homers. The pro hitters would catch up to him and learn his tendencies and obviously if he is too stubborn to make any modifications, he would struggle even more. In any event, he may have won 14 games for the White Sox as the 5th starter and may win 12 with Texas as #3 but I'm not so sure that Floyd or whoever wins the 5th spot now can't do the same...given the offense we will have.

[Dick Allen]

Floyd, for all his faults, keeps the ball down better than McCarthy and has some movement (sink) on his fastball.

FWIW, all those bashing McCarthy for giving up the longball, 17 in 84 innings, Floyd gave up 14 in 54 innings in the NL and hitters hit .315 against him.

[Steve9347]

Brian?

 

I think he meant Brandon, and I completely agree. He does not throw 93-94.

[KevHead0881]

How is this depressing? We get two pitchers for one, one of which is just as good as the one we got rid of. That sounds good to me.

 

Thats what I was thinking. This actually made me feel a little better about the deal. And even if Danks is merely the left handed equal of McCarthy, he'd still be better for us if his stuff is better suited for the Cell, as Kenny has said. Not to mention that left handers generally have higher value. If Massett can turn into anything, this trade could look pretty good in the long run.

 

Unfortunately, we'll have to wait a little bit to find all this out.

[Dick Allen]

Thats what I was thinking. This actually made me feel a little better about the deal. And even if Danks is merely the left handed equal of McCarthy, he'd still be better for us if his stuff is better suited for the Cell, as Kenny has said. Not to mention that left handers generally have higher value. If Massett can turn into anything, this trade could look pretty good in the long run.

 

Unfortunately, we'll have to wait a little bit to find all this out.

Whether Danks is as good as McCarthy is anyone's guess. The Rangers apparently didn't think so.

[Balta1701]

Whether Danks is as good as McCarthy is anyone's guess. The Rangers apparently didn't think so.

That's not necessarily true. The Rangers may well have thought that Danks will actually be better than McCarthy, but if you look at things from the Rangers perspective, their "Window" closes in 2008. I know for a fact that Mark Teixeira hits Free Agency after 2008, and as he's a Boras client, he won't be signing any extensions before hitting the open market. On top of that, Michael Young hits Free Agency at the end of 2008 as well, and Hank Blalock hits at the end of 2009.

 

With this roster, their window basically closes at the end of 2008, maybe at the end of 07 if they want to get something by trading Tex and Young. They need pitchers for 2007. Danks probably shouldn't see the big leagues until mid-07 at the very earliest, maybe 08 even better, and who knows how long it would take him to adapt to that level given that it has taken him a little while to adapt at each level he's stopped at.

 

The Rangers wanted someone who could pitch for them right now, and they got that.

[Dick Allen]

That's not necessarily true. The Rangers may well have thought that Danks will actually be better than McCarthy, but if you look at things from the Rangers perspective, their "Window" closes in 2008. I know for a fact that Mark Teixeira hits Free Agency after 2008, and as he's a Boras client, he won't be signing any extensions before hitting the open market. On top of that, Michael Young hits Free Agency at the end of 2008 as well, and Hank Blalock hits at the end of 2009.

 

With this roster, their window basically closes at the end of 2008, maybe at the end of 07 if they want to get something by trading Tex and Young. They need pitchers for 2007. Danks probably shouldn't see the big leagues until mid-07 at the very earliest, maybe 08 even better, and who knows how long it would take him to adapt to that level given that it has taken him a little while to adapt at each level he's stopped at.

 

The Rangers wanted someone who could pitch for them right now, and they got that.

Didn't KW say Danks along with Floyd would be competing for the White Sox 5th starter role? Isn't Dye a free agent and Buerhle after 2007 for the White Sox. Isn't Garland and Crede gone after 2008? Doesn't Texas sign Boras clients? I'm all for extending windows, and acquiring young pitchers is probably the best way to do it. I just don't understand why you trade a guy the organization built up to be some can't miss star, a guy KW said had to have a spot in the rotation even as he was struggling in the bullpen, and then discard him and call him serviceable. For all we know KW will think Danks and Masset and Floyd are all "serviceable" at this time next year. At least hopefully they will all be "serviceable." I really think McCarthy struggles last year are overrated. A lot of great pitchers struggled early in their career. I think he's a better pitcher than Danks.

[spiderman]

I thought this thread was about Brian Anderson's take on the trade.

[mike lals]

I took my son to a pitching camp that Don Cooper was running,along with Kevin Hickey.During the session I asked him who our 5th starter is.Coop said Floyd

Danks

Massett

Broadway

Haeger

Phillips

Sisco all have a chance at it.I am warming up to the fact that we traded both pitchers for prospects.I think we made the road a little more treacherous to get back to the post season but we have to trust our guys.

 

One other thing Coop said is, after talking to Massett, on the phone he believes the kid`s a winner just based on the things he said to him.Anyway Coop is pumped, he said his other 4 SP are all in great shape, and that our starting pitching should rebound from last year and our bullpen has alot of live arms from which to choose from.GO SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fathom]

I can't believe that after all the talk of how pitching wins championships, and KW's acquisition of Vazquez last year, that we're looking at going into the season with Gavin Floyd as our 5th starter.

[SkokieSox]

I can't believe that after all the talk of how pitching wins championships, and KW's acquisition of Vazquez last year, that we're looking at going into the season with Gavin Floyd as our 5th starter.

 

He's a young Garland, and I have no problems with him in the rotation. Give him a chance with Coop.

[spiderman]

I can't believe that after all the talk of how pitching wins championships, and KW's acquisition of Vazquez last year, that we're looking at going into the season with Gavin Floyd as our 5th starter.

 

I'm assuming you feel that this is a bad thing, correct ?

[fathom]

I'm assuming you feel that this is a bad thing, correct ?

 

Oh yes

 

He's a young Garland, and I have no problems with him in the rotation. Give him a chance with Coop.

 

The only thing he has in common with Garland is that they're were drafted out of high school and got traded. His numbers don't even compare to those of Garland in the minors.

[spiderman]

Oh yes

The only thing he has in common with Garland is that they're were drafted out of high school and got traded. His numbers don't even compare to those of Garland in the minors.

 

What kind of year do you see Floyd having, should the White Sox give him 30 starts ?

[fathom]

What kind of year do you see Floyd having, should the White Sox give him 30 starts ?

 

I'll make the pessimistic (shocking, I know) prediction that he'd never last 30 starts. From everything I've seen and heard, I'd be stunned if he had an ERA less than 5.50 starting in the AL.

Edited January 7, 2007 by fathom

[maggsmaggs]

I'll make the pessimistic (shocking, I know) prediction that he'd never last 30 starts. From everything I've seen and heard, I'd be stunned if he had an ERA less than 5.50 starting in the AL.

I think he can be around 5, but I agree with you that he will not get 30 starts. At least this time around, we have 3-5 more options we can go to.

[fathom]

I think he can be around 5, but I agree with you that he will not get 30 starts. At least this time around, we have 3-5 more options we can go to.

 

I have my doubts about him being around 5 when guys like Buehrle and Garcia struggle to stay below that point. I'll be the first to make a Cooper Congratulatory Thread if Floyd has an ERA below 5.50.