Jump to content

The GREAT Daniel Hudson


macsandz

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 301
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Paint it Black @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 08:53 AM)
Just because Danks didn't sign the extension doesn't mean he wont. He's simply betting that he can get more money, and I don't really blame him.

 

Ultimately I think he signs if the Sox pony up for 5 years which in this particular case I have no problem with. He has shown he can stay healthy and I think he has been the best pitcher on the team the past 3 years.

 

How do you "think" something that is a fact? Danks HAS been the best starter, and there is no question. Although now that I've said that, I'm sure Balta or someone who loves to argue will try to refute it :lolhitting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 12:07 PM)
How do you "think" something that is a fact? Danks HAS been the best starter, and there is no question. Although now that I've said that, I'm sure Balta or someone who loves to argue will try to refute it :lolhitting

Who would I argue on our roster has been better than D1? Jackson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, the joys of SoxTalk when the team has a s***ty week...we get to see threads like this.

 

I don't give a damn either way, we have Jackson now, I think he has done quite well overall, and if he does well enough this year, we'll be compensated for it either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 11:08 AM)
Who would I argue on our roster has been better than D1? Jackson?

 

I don't even mean it as an insult. Guys like you and Badger just love to argue and play the devil's advocate. So when I made a definitive statement such as Danks has unquestionably been the best starter, I almost expect a rebuttal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 11:07 AM)
How do you "think" something that is a fact? Danks HAS been the best starter, and there is no question. Although now that I've said that, I'm sure Balta or someone who loves to argue will try to refute it :lolhitting

 

 

But just because he's been the best starter since 2008 doesn't mean he's worth $75 million for 5 years, either.

 

Now you can argue that Buehrle wasn't worth his last contract either, but that's a little bit difference circumstance based on what he did for the organization prior to that....his popularity and longevity and identification with the Sox.

 

I don't think Danks comes close to 50% of Buehrle's or Konerko's popularity, especially in terms of the personal relationship with JR.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think player popularity plays into this contract as much as you do. The question that KW and JR will be asking is whether 5/75M is fair value for Danks, and are they willing to pay it and possibly(probably) lose Buehrle in the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 11:25 AM)
But just because he's been the best starter since 2008 doesn't mean he's worth $75 million for 5 years, either.

 

Now you can argue that Buehrle wasn't worth his last contract either, but that's a little bit difference circumstance based on what he did for the organization prior to that....his popularity and longevity and identification with the Sox.

 

I don't think Danks comes close to 50% of Buehrle's or Konerko's popularity, especially in terms of the personal relationship with JR.

 

He's not worth 5/75. He's worth a lot more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the open market, Danks is undoubtedly worth more.

 

Does anyone really believe that JR will give a $100 million dollar contract to a non-superstar pitcher for five years or more?

 

Let's say we're talking a contract somewhere in the vicinity of the Braun deal that was recently announced. Barring some type of incredible 2005/2006 run, I just don't see the cost/benefit analysis on that one ending up in favor of Danks sticking around with the Sox.

 

He just happens to be the most important trade chip in any rebuilding effort. Hopefully they don't go that direction, and there's certainly logic to retaining Danks if Buehrle is actually planning to leave the Sox or retire. It always comes back to Peavy.

 

If he's healthy enough, then you have three starters (Floyd/Danks/Peavy) and theoretically Sale. But to rebuild an entire rotation around Floyd and Sale, that's a huge non-starter in terms of "patching" on the go or "reloading" and finally points to rebuilding. (That is, unless there's a big offset in insurance for Peavy not pitching for the major league team for the remainder of his contract.)

Edited by caulfield12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Apr 22, 2011 -> 12:39 PM)
Not happening.

 

As in the Yankees would never trade Montero? I don't think anybody in their system is off limits with their starting pitching situation. Nothing will happen this year (unless the Sox really stink up the joint). If KW could get Montero and one of Betances/Banuelos (and I would accept no less for a pitcher of Danks' caliber), I'd praise him like I do Cargo.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...