DBAHO Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Thought I'd start this up to get people thoughts on this. B-Mac to Texas for Nick Masset and John Danks. Right now, if you're KW, would you still make this deal, based on talent? FWIW here are the numbers of all 3 for 2007; B-Mac - 5-10, 4.87 ERA, 59K's and 48BB's. Danks - 6-13, 5.50 ERA, 109K's and 54BB's. Masset - 2-3, 7.09 ERA, 21K's and 26BB's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 07:52 AM) Thought I'd start this up to get people thoughts on this. B-Mac to Texas for Nick Masset and John Danks. Right now, if you're KW, would you still make this deal, based on talent? FWIW here are the numbers of all 3 for 2007; B-Mac - 5-10, 4.87 ERA, 59K's and 48BB's. Danks - 6-13, 5.50 ERA, 109K's and 54BB's. Masset - 2-3, 7.09 ERA, 21K's and 26BB's. This trade obviously hasn't worked out for either side yet. I was very much against this trade when it was made. Right now if you made the trade, it basically would be McCarthy for Danks because Masset is out of options and I don't think you could reasonably assume he would make the team. Whether I would do it or not would be a decision left up to the medical people concerning BMac's injury. If he is or can fully heal without it becoming a chronic problem, I still would rather have him than Danks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 05:52 AM) Thought I'd start this up to get people thoughts on this. B-Mac to Texas for Nick Masset and John Danks. Right now, if you're KW, would you still make this deal, based on talent? FWIW here are the numbers of all 3 for 2007; B-Mac - 5-10, 4.87 ERA, 59K's and 48BB's. Danks - 6-13, 5.50 ERA, 109K's and 54BB's. Masset - 2-3, 7.09 ERA, 21K's and 26BB's. The one number that cannot be overlooked is HRs: B-Mac - 101.2 IP, 9 HR Danks - 139.0 IP, 28 HR Danks is two years younger, and is a southpaw. With those factors, the trade is basically a wash. Also, if Floyd doesn't completely suck in Spring Training, Danks plays in AAA all year. This is one of those trades that you need to look at in 2 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Danks wasn't even supposed to be in the Majors this year and learned a lot on the MLB level... I still think he'll wind up being the best of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkokieSox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I'm still happy with the trade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Danks wasnt supposed to even play in the majors this year, but showed enough stones and talent to warrant a full season before he was due. This trade STILL looks great for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Sometimes the margin of difference is so small, it doesn't matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That funky motion Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Very happy with the trade. Danks showed a lot this year and if I remember correctly, the defense let him down quite a bit, and they were not recorded as errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 We also get one more year of pre-FA Danks than we would've gotten with B-Mac, so that's something to keep in mind. For the next two years, though, it wouldn't surprise me to see B-Mac put up better numbers than Danks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Right now, I don't see much difference between this trade and the Neal Cotts/David Aardsma trade. Both sides thought they'd be getting something better out of it than what they got so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 And I think this is the reality for most trades. No clear winner or loser. Certainly the really lopsided, obvious trades are the minority. This one is interesting because it is pitcher for pitcher and can be evaluated easier. The take this off my surplus and give me that to fill a hole trade is much more difficult to evaluate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(RME JICO @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 07:33 AM) The one number that cannot be overlooked is HRs: B-Mac - 101.2 IP, 9 HR Danks - 139.0 IP, 28 HR Danks is two years younger, and is a southpaw. With those factors, the trade is basically a wash. Also, if Floyd doesn't completely suck in Spring Training, Danks plays in AAA all year. This is one of those trades that you need to look at in 2 years. Then again, you can look at the strikeout to walk ratio and Danks definitely comes out on top of that, which bodes well for him. Add in the fact that he is a lefty and the additional year before free agency, then it's looking pretty good on the home front. Also, Masset is not completely out of the equation yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 There's a chance nobody in this trade will amount to anything more than Kip Wells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 (edited) I would still do this trade and I'm still happy with it. Edited October 24, 2007 by BearSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Zelig Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Didn't the Sox get a third pitcher also? What is his name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 02:02 PM) Didn't the Sox get a third pitcher also? What is his name? Jacob Rasner. AAP Page. Went 7-11 with a 6.83 ERA at Kannapolis this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 04:09 PM) Jacob Rasner. AAP Page. Went 7-11 with a 6.83 ERA at Kannapolis this year. Wasn't he part of hte Chris Stewart deal or was there another terrible single A pitcher in that deal. To skew things even more compare who they had to pitch against. I think Danks really ran out gas or he really benefitted from the cold weather. Funny how bad April was and beautiful October was/is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 02:22 PM) Wasn't he part of hte Chris Stewart deal or was there another terrible single A pitcher in that deal. To skew things even more compare who they had to pitch against. I think Danks really ran out gas or he really benefitted from the cold weather. Funny how bad April was and beautiful October was/is. Not optimistic about their pursuit of free agent Barry Zito, the Texas Rangers acquired right-hander Brandon McCarthy from the Chicago White Sox in a five-player deal on Saturday. The Rangers gave up 2003 first-round pick John Danks, a 21-year left-hander who hasn't yet pitched in the major leagues, and right- handers Nick Masset and Jacob Rasner in exchange for McCarthy and 18- year-old outfielder David Paisano. Link. Chris Stewart was traded for John Lujan. Went 2-5 with a 3.73 ERA at Winston Salem, at age 23. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 This trade didn't make much sense to me when it happened but nobody is winning this thing as of yet. IMO, Brandon will be the better pitcher but we'll have to see, hopefully I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasox24 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I liked the trade when it was made and I still do. BMac has now played in over 2 big league seasons. At the same point in their careers, Danks will have a better ERA and overall numbers than McCarthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(SEALgep @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 08:35 AM) I'm still happy with the trade... So am I. I really despised the Vazquez trade, then again, I thought Brian Anderson was good then. Boy, was that a joke! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scenario Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 04:25 PM) Link. Chris Stewart was traded for John Lujan. Went 2-5 with a 3.73 ERA at Winston Salem, at age 23. Lujan's stats are a little misleading. He pitched in 49 games. 48 as a reliever and started one game. If not for the bad start, he looked pretty good. Relief / Start W 2 / 0 L 4 / 1 ERA 2.95 / 27.00 G 48 / 1 IP 79 / 2.2 H 68 / 8 R 36 / 8 ER 26 / 8 HR 6 / 1 BB 34 / 3 SO 87 / 3 BAA .226 / .570 Edited October 24, 2007 by scenario Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiderman Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Why is John Denks considered to be a prize prospect ? He doesn't blow people away, and while I think he'll get better, am I wrong to think he's, at best, a #3 starter a few seasons down the road ? What am I missing - why is Denks considered a prized pitcher when acquired by the White Sox ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(spiderman @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 06:58 PM) Why is John Denks considered to be a prize prospect ? He doesn't blow people away, and while I think he'll get better, am I wrong to think he's, at best, a #3 starter a few seasons down the road ? What am I missing - why is Denks considered a prized pitcher when acquired by the White Sox ? Because KW said so, and he was the GM when the White Sox won the WS so he is never wrong. There's a lot to be positive about with Danks, and there are some red flags. Most pitchers struggle when they are his age, and at least at the beginning of the year, he had a nice killer instinct, and attacked hitters. Running out of gas when he did has to be a concern. 130 IP on the year, and the last 40 or so were painful. He also stopped attacking hitters. Did facing him a few times let them figure him out? I certainly don't think he'll be an ace, but what's wrong with a #3? There are a lot of teams that would love to have a #3. I think it will take a while for him to reach that status though. For 2008, I just don't see how he suddenly is going to be able to give you 175-200 innings. Its one of the reasons trading Garland will be a huge gamble. There will be a ton of innings that need to be picked up, and the in house candidates to pick them up are definitely questionable at best as far as having much major league success in 2008. Edited October 25, 2007 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 This is the kind of deal you really can't judge for a few years. You have three young pitchers involved, which might make the trade an even longer term thing to evaluate. Personally have dealt with the junior and elder McCarthy's, I hope both teams win this trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.