iamshack Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 09:10 PM) No downside risk? Like his completely sucking offensively? I think I hit that one. His sucking offensively is going to cost you what? The difference between winning 69 games versus winning 71 games? And if you actually do compete, like say the Padres did in 2010, you just give him back to the White Sox and lose out on $50k? The worst thing you lose is a roster spot, which could have been taken up by someone else that's currently in your system. But odds are you don't have a ton of replacements if you played a guy that hit for a .600 OPS last year and you didn't bring up anyone too promising in September to replace him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:15 PM) His sucking offensively is going to cost you what? The difference between winning 69 games versus winning 71 games? And if you actually do compete, like say the Padres did in 2010, you just give him back to the White Sox and lose out on $50k? The worst thing you lose is a roster spot, which could have been taken up by someone else that's currently in your system. But odds are you don't have a ton of replacements if you played a guy that hit for a .600 OPS last year and you didn't bring up anyone too promising in September to replace him. In all seriousness... How many guys are Rule 5 claims based on CF defense? has that ever actually happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 09:16 PM) In all seriousness... How many guys are Rule 5 claims based on CF defense? has that ever actually happened? Actually, this is exactly the kind of guys that are rule 5 claims. If they already had a ton of inherent value, they would be protected. These picks are usually teams seeing something in a player and hoping to extract value from him by trying something that his current team has not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:20 PM) Actually, this is exactly the kind of guys that are rule 5 claims. If they already had a ton of inherent value, they would be protected. These picks are usually teams seeing something in a player and hoping to extract value from him by trying something that his current team has not. Inherent value? Seriously? The guy strikes out at an Adam Dunn rate with no power. Where is the value in that? The guy has 33 homers... in 1500 plus ABs. There is no market for Jordan Danks. He is Brent Gretzky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 Ya, Jordan Danks blows. It certainly doesn't hurt to protect him but I'm not going to shed a tear if we don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 09:23 PM) Inherent value? Seriously? The guy strikes out at an Adam Dunn rate with no power. Where is the value in that? The guy has 33 homers... in 1500 plus ABs. There is no market for Jordan Danks. He is Brent Gretzky. I dunno, maybe he turns into an Austin Jackson type player? Again, you're acting as if no player has struggled in the minors and then had some sort of mental lightbulb go on that caused him to succeed in the major leagues. Certainly the odds are that it won't happen, but it does happen. Which is why these guys are left unprotected and why some teams take chances on them in the Rule 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:27 PM) I dunno, maybe he turns into an Austin Jackson type player? Again, you're acting as if no player has struggled in the minors and then had some sort of mental lightbulb go on that caused him to succeed in the major leagues. Certainly the odds are that it won't happen, but it does happen. Which is why these guys are left unprotected and why some teams take chances on them in the Rule 5. You can struggle in the minors, but if you want teams to buy in, you have to show some tools. Hit for average. Hit for power. You can't strike out once per three ABs without showing 40 homer potential. Defense is not enough to make up for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 09:29 PM) You can struggle in the minors, but if you want teams to buy in, you have to show some tools. Hit for average. Hit for power. You can't strike out once per three ABs without showing 40 homer potential. Defense is not enough to make up for that. You are missing the point. Go look at Johan Santana's minor league numbers when the Twins selected him in the Rule 5. I'm sure there were people who believed he would never amount to anything either. Edit: Actually, the Marlins drafted Santana and then traded him to the Twins in a prearranged deal. Edited October 26, 2011 by iamshack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigruss Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:33 PM) You are missing the point. Go look at Johan Santana's minor league numbers when the Twins selected him in the Rule 5. I'm sure there were people who believed he would never amount to anything either. Chances are slim he gets better, but teams look for a tool that is already solid and see if they can build from there. In JD's case, it's his defense that plays perfectly in Petco Park. They aren't going to win anyways, so trying to find a player that just "gets it" with the bad somehow would be a decent risk for them considering his defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:29 PM) You can struggle in the minors, but if you want teams to buy in, you have to show some tools. Hit for average. Hit for power. You can't strike out once per three ABs without showing 40 homer potential. Defense is not enough to make up for that. Hence, the Brian Anderson/Torii Hunter comparisons that KW always made when extrapolating his potential results out over a full season. Let's say Danks is even a notch better than Anderson, for argument's sake. Because he plays CF, a team should at least consider it...what's the risk if the most you can lose is 50 grand? That you're blocking a phenom that could be putting up a 900+ OPS? Not in the SD system. Hoyer traded everyone to Boston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I'm pretty much in the middle on this one. Danks really has no value to the White Sox right now, he's not that good of a prospect, but he's shown a bit of power in the past and plays good defense. If a coach within your system can get through to him and he hits a little bit, you have a 2-3 WAR player on your hands in his good seasons. If I'm Houston or Minnesota - especially Minnesota who pretty much have jack squat in the minors for OFers right now - I'll take a chance on Danks in a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 04:59 AM) I'm pretty much in the middle on this one. Danks really has no value to the White Sox right now, he's not that good of a prospect, but he's shown a bit of power in the past and plays good defense. If a coach within your system can get through to him and he hits a little bit, you have a 2-3 WAR player on your hands in his good seasons. If I'm Houston or Minnesota - especially Minnesota who pretty much have jack squat in the minors for OFers right now - I'll take a chance on Danks in a second. I guess my question to you is who are the players the White Sox should be protecting rather than Danks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 25, 2011 -> 10:33 PM) You are missing the point. Go look at Johan Santana's minor league numbers when the Twins selected him in the Rule 5. I'm sure there were people who believed he would never amount to anything either. Edit: Actually, the Marlins drafted Santana and then traded him to the Twins in a prearranged deal. Is Danks recovering from Tommy John or something I don't know about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 06:02 AM) I guess my question to you is who are the players the White Sox should be protecting rather than Danks? I'd rather either not tie up the rosters spots for future moves, or take a chance on someone else in the rule 5 versus keeping Danks protected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 08:30 AM) I'd rather either not tie up the rosters spots for future moves, or take a chance on someone else in the rule 5 versus keeping Danks protected. Has there been any point in the last 5+ years where "Not enough roster spots" has caused us to make a move we really regretted? There was a roster spot for Randy Williams for crying out loud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 26, 2011 Author Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 07:49 AM) Has there been any point in the last 5+ years where "Not enough roster spots" has caused us to make a move we really regretted? There was a roster spot for Randy Williams for crying out loud. And as noted earlier, after those folks become FA's, the 40 man roster is at 31 or 32. Even if you protect 4 of those 5 minor leaguers, you still have 4 or 5 spots open on the 40-man roster BEFORE trading anyone. Shouldn't be a problem to put Danks on there, and they can drop him later if need be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 07:55 AM) And as noted earlier, after those folks become FA's, the 40 man roster is at 31 or 32. Even if you protect 4 of those 5 minor leaguers, you still have 4 or 5 spots open on the 40-man roster BEFORE trading anyone. Shouldn't be a problem to put Danks on there, and they can drop him later if need be. Eh. I'm sure he will be protected. If he was Jordan Jones, no one would care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 08:57 AM) Eh. I'm sure he will be protected. If he was Jordan Jones, no one would care. Except for GM's who have adapted to the modern era of baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 08:11 AM) Except for GM's who have adapted to the modern era of baseball. Or fans that haven't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 05:59 AM) I'm pretty much in the middle on this one. Danks really has no value to the White Sox right now, he's not that good of a prospect, but he's shown a bit of power in the past and plays good defense. If a coach within your system can get through to him and he hits a little bit, you have a 2-3 WAR player on your hands in his good seasons. If I'm Houston or Minnesota - especially Minnesota who pretty much have jack squat in the minors for OFers right now - I'll take a chance on Danks in a second. I agree. He increased his overall power, bb rate, contact, stolen base rate, and reduced his k's (though not that drastically) after his second stint in AAA. He was a pretty touted prospect in Texas who was always a stud with the glove. (also had his k issues, though he did walk alot) Scouts were keen on him if he would ever develop the power. Personally, I think he'll be a 4th OF in the bigs at this point, but it wouldn't hurt holding onto him if the sox go that route. Edited October 26, 2011 by SoxAce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 04:59 AM) I'm pretty much in the middle on this one. Danks really has no value to the White Sox right now, he's not that good of a prospect, but he's shown a bit of power in the past and plays good defense. If a coach within your system can get through to him and he hits a little bit, you have a 2-3 WAR player on your hands in his good seasons. If I'm Houston or Minnesota - especially Minnesota who pretty much have jack squat in the minors for OFers right now - I'll take a chance on Danks in a second. Depends on how they fit Revere, Span (if he ever recovers) and Hicks (eventually) into the picture. Then you have Cuddyer and Kubel, possibly/probably one of them returning. But I guess you could argue Danks is better than Rene Tosoni. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 08:30 AM) I agree. He increased his overall power, bb rate, contact, stolen base rate, and reduced his k's (though not that drastically) after his second stint in AAA. He was a pretty touted prospect in Texas who was always a stud with the glove. (also had his k issues, though he did walk alot) Scouts were keen on him if he would ever develop the power. Personally, I think he'll be a 4th OF in the bigs at this point, but it wouldn't hurt holding onto him if the sox go that route. SoxAce, master of logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 26, 2011 -> 06:02 AM) I guess my question to you is who are the players the White Sox should be protecting rather than Danks? That's not a question I can answer at this point. I don't recall exactly when the protection deadline is - December 1st maybe? - but it's obviously before the Winter Meetings because that's when the draft itself is. If the Sox have made enough moves by that time frame - which I strongly doubt will be the case - to tie up all of the roster spots, then I would say they need to protect those players. If they haven't, then I'm obviously protecting Danks because he actually has the potential to be better than fodder. So, as an economics major, all I can say is that it depends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[email protected] Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 (edited) http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/schedule/important_dates.jsp Nov. 18, 2011 Day to file reserve lists for all Major and Minor League levels. Nov. 21, 2011 AL Most Valuable Player Award announced Nov. 22, 2011 NL Most Valuable Player Award announced Nov. 23, 2011 Last date for former club to offer salary arbitration to ranked XX(B) free agents in order to be eligible for compensation. Deadline is midnight. Dec. 1, 2011 Last day to request outright waivers to assign player prior to Rule 5 Draft Dec. 5, 2011 5 p.m. ET is last time to outright a player prior to the Rule 5 Draft Dec. 7, 2011 Last date for player who declared free agency to accept an arbitration offer from former club. Deadline is midnight ET Dec. 5-8, 2011 Baseball Winter Meetings, Dallas, TX Dec. 8, 2011 Major League Rule 5 Draft, Dallas, TX Edited October 27, 2011 by NHDadUmp-RI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Absolutely have to take advantage of the shallow pitching market and move Danks now. 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.