Would You Sign Danks to the "Weaver" Deal?

[ChiSox_Sonix]

Best GM in baseball gave up up a 160 era + for a 76 ops +.

 

Its limited sample size but im pretty sure if the roles were reversed youd be calling Kenny the dumbest man alive.

 

As for Danks, might as well trade him because no way are the Sox giving him 5 years.

 

Best GM in baseball also was the only one to fail to sign his first round pick

[caulfield12]

That's part of his "master strategy."

 

To reallocate the money even more efficiently for next year's draft class.

 

It was planned from the beginning. The White Sox did the same when they didn't sign Bobby Seay and AJ Hinch.

 

Haha.

[southsider2k5]

That's part of his "master strategy."

 

To reallocate the money even more efficiently for next year's draft class.

 

It was planned from the beginning. The White Sox did the same when they didn't sign Bobby Seay and AJ Hinch.

 

Haha.

 

Bobby Seay wasn't planned. It was a technicality that Borass pulled to get them declared as FA's.

[caulfield12]

I was joking.

 

Just funny it turned out perfectly fine we didn't sign the likes of Hinch, Seay and Bobby Hill.

 

Goodwin might a different matter (from 2009).

[southsider2k5]

I was joking.

 

Just funny it turned out perfectly fine we didn't sign the likes of Hinch, Seay and Bobby Hill.

 

Goodwin might a different matter (from 2009).

 

Jeff Weaver was a guy who fell into that group as well.

[greg775]

I wouldn't sign Weaver to the Weaver deal.

[caulfield12]

Greg, you're crazy.

 

He would get $40-60 million more on the open market, and probably an additional year.

 

 

[Rowand44]

I wouldn't sign Weaver to the Weaver deal.

You're insane.

[hogan873]

So, if Weaver signed a "hometown discount" (and I would agree he did), Danks signing a hometown discount here would have to be less than $15 million/year...maybe even a little as $12 million. In my mind, he's worth $13 to $15 million tops and maybe 3-4 years. I don't see him signing for little as the Sox would be willing to pay. Trading him this offseason would probably be the way to go.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I wouldn't sign Weaver to the Weaver deal.

 

[caulfield12]

I wouldn't sign Greg, Ozzie and Juan Pierre to the Juan Pierre Dodgers' deal.

 

Joking Greg.

 

Went to the Royals/Red Sox game in KC Thursday night, btw. Really impressed with all the changes in the outfield bleachers and concourses.

Wish they would bury those Tide/Bounce detergent signs around the entrances in the upper deck, though, makes it look like a cheesy minor league stadium in those sections.

Edited August 22, 2011 by caulfield12

[cabiness42]

Questions about the Danks brothers:

 

1) Does Jordan have a legitimate shot at playing for the Sox in the next few years?

 

2) If so, does John have some incentive to take less money to play with his brother?

 

 

[Balta1701]

Questions about the Danks brothers:

 

1) Does Jordan have a legitimate shot at playing for the Sox in the next few years?

 

2) If so, does John have some incentive to take less money to play with his brother?

1. D2 has not developed as well as we hoped he would have. Still strikes out way too much. He might well get a september callup this year, but right now he's a 4th/5th outfielder. He's supposedly a solid defender, but he would probably look a lot like Adam Dunn with the bat if he was called up.

 

2. This is another of those things where if there was a big, big incentive for D1 to play with D2, he'd have signed a contract extension already. D1 might give a small discount for that...but you can tell a lot from the fact that it hasn't been done yet.

[JohnCangelosi]

2) If so, does John have some incentive to take less money to play with his brother?

If John was 36 instead of 26 and had already made $100 M in the league sure he probably would think about it then. But not now. Time to get paid.

[southsider2k5]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...rtnerId=rss_cws

 

ANAHEIM -- John Danks was having lunch with Mark Buehrle on Tuesday afternoon, when Buehrle mentioned Jered Weaver's new five-year, $85-million deal announced later that day by the Angels.

 

And what was Danks' reaction to Weaver's new baseball treasure trove?

 

"To be honest, I didn't even know," Danks said with a laugh. "I don't know if that has any effect on me or not."

 

With Weaver playing out west, for a different team, his signing clearly doesn't have a direct effect on Danks. But every contract for a potential free-agent hurler in that elite category, which would include both Buehrle and Danks, has a direct effect on the market.

 

The Angels' ace, who entered Wednesday's contest with a remarkable 2.10 ERA, would have been a free agent after the 2012 season, as Danks will be.

 

Danks simply laughs and defers contract talk to his agent, Jeff Berry, who also represents Buehrle, when asked if Weaver's deal sets the bar for the future.

 

"I swear to you, I wouldn't even know where anything would start I'm so far out of the loop," Danks said. "I'm just trying to salvage the season."

 

Sitting at 5-9 with a 3.88 ERA, Danks has fought his way back from a dreadful 0-8 start and a strained right oblique to put at the top of the White Sox rotation. The 26-year-old might not quite yet be in Weaver's stratosphere, but when healthy, he's a consistent 30-start, 200-inning hurler who gives his team a chance to win.

 

Staying with the White Sox is a goal for Danks, just as it seemed to be when Buehrle agreed to his four-year, $56-million deal that ends after this season.

 

"It's a little easier than Mark's situation," Danks said. "He had a family at the time and didn't want to move them around. You want to be happy where you are at. I like it here. I like the people here, and in a perfect world, it would get worked out."