Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Just out of curiosity, I was wondering what you guys would have done in the offseason. My personal preference was to keep Buehrle and deal Danks, but reading through gamethreads I was somewhat surprised to see people agreeing with the decision that was made. Obviously Danks current situation and season plus Buehrle's performance in Miami have made it look really bad. But at the same time, I cannot say I am surprised to see it turn out this way. You knew what you were going to get with Buehrle every season, mid to high 3.00 ERA, 12-14 wins, innings eater, stretches of surprising dominance. Unfortunately to me, I also felt like i knew what we were getting with Danks every season, a pitcher that can never seem to hold a lead, strange injuries and ineffectiveness for long stretches, anywhere from 8-13 wins in a season. What say you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:09 AM) Just out of curiosity, I was wondering what you guys would have done in the offseason. My personal preference was to keep Buehrle and deal Danks, but reading through gamethreads I was somewhat surprised to see people agreeing with the decision that was made. Obviously Danks current situation and season plus Buehrle's performance in Miami have made it look really bad. But at the same time, I cannot say I am surprised to see it turn out this way. You knew what you were going to get with Buehrle every season, mid to high 3.00 ERA, 12-14 wins, innings eater, stretches of surprising dominance. Unfortunately to me, I also felt like i knew what we were getting with Danks every season, a pitcher that can never seem to hold a lead, strange injuries and ineffectiveness for long stretches, anywhere from 8-13 wins in a season. What say you? Because of my love for Buehrle, I agreed with this. Also, we could have gotten a nice piece for Danks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Letting Buehrle go was the right move. Signing Danks is iffy, but at his age, it's not too objectionable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackattack Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I saw nothing wrong with the Danks deal when it happened. He is good and young, they were paying him to be the new Buehrle over the next few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Knackattack @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) I saw nothing wrong with the Danks deal when it happened. He is good and young, they were paying him to be the new Buehrle over the next few years. I agree with one of these things. I dont know what they saw that made them think he was going to be Buehrle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackattack Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 09:19 AM) I agree with one of these things. I dont know what they saw that made them think he was going to be Buehrle (Previously) Durable, reliable, fan favorite, homegrown lefty that puts up good numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Knackattack @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:27 AM) (Previously) Durable, reliable, fan favorite, homegrown lefty that puts up good numbers. All untrue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 The rush to sign Danks was a gamble that had more downside to it than upside. You can't blame Williams for the injury, but it was curious to extend him coming off of a subpar year. They didn't get all that great a discount on him either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 looking at his splits, he is wretched in April, May, August and September. He has his worst winning percentage, gives up his most homeruns, his era is high, he gives up a lot of hits. So basically you cannot count on him at the beginning or end of a season. And this stat is fun. When the offense scores 0-2 runs, he is 5-39, with a 4.02 ERA and a 1.31 WHIP When the offense scores 3-5 runs, he is 20-17, with a 3.87 ERA and a 1.27 WHIP When the offense scores 6+ runs, he is 32-4, with a 4.57 ERA and a 1.36 WHIP So you cannot count on him in low scoring games. And even in high scoring games that he wins a lot, he gives up a lot of runs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackattack Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 09:28 AM) All untrue Really? He averaged 31 starts over the past 4 years, 195 IP and hasn't been an injury concern. Also he played here since his rookie season on out of ST, good enough as homegrown to me. He has been ours his entire ML career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Knackattack @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:35 AM) Really? He averaged 31 starts over the past 4 years, 195 IP and hasn't been an injury concern. Also he played here since his rookie season on out of ST, good enough as homegrown to me. He has been ours his entire ML career. Every season he goes on the DL for some issue or another. blisters, circulation, shoulder issues. And now he gets paid and the guy is talking to Dr Yocum, and you want to say he is durable? Screw that. he is a disappointment. He has been for a long time. Last year was basically his contract year and he had his worst professional season since his rookie season, and only pitched 170 innings. Looks like he is right on track to do that again this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 What's the latest on the Danks injury? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:47 AM) What's the latest on the Danks injury? Mystery Medical Theater 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:35 AM) looking at his splits, he is wretched in April, May, August and September. He has his worst winning percentage, gives up his most homeruns, his era is high, he gives up a lot of hits. So basically you cannot count on him at the beginning or end of a season. And this stat is fun. When the offense scores 0-2 runs, he is 5-39, with a 4.02 ERA and a 1.31 WHIP When the offense scores 3-5 runs, he is 20-17, with a 3.87 ERA and a 1.27 WHIP When the offense scores 6+ runs, he is 32-4, with a 4.57 ERA and a 1.36 WHIP So you cannot count on him in low scoring games. And even in high scoring games that he wins a lot, he gives up a lot of runs. Take a look at Buehrle's stats in those same situations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 You can't argue with how often he's been able to take the hill. I consider that durable and reliable. I don't expect him to compete for any Cy Young awards, but I think by the end of this deal we'll believe we did the right thing. And Mark Buehrle was my favorite White Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Danks isn't getting paid all that much this year. Next year is when the big bucks start rolling in. Its always a gamble to give any pitcher 4 or 5 or even more years. So far it looks like a mistake, but judging it now is so silly its beyond ridiculous. I wish the Sox brought back Buerhle. He was willing to take less than he received, yet there was no offer, and considering they were trying to throw some money Soler's way, its apparent the checking account wasn't as low as they have expertly have it perceived. But signing Danks is a decent move. You win with pitching. He's young, and up until now has been very healthy. He had a circulation problem several years ago that was cleared up quickly, and last year had a rib cage injury. So the injury concern was minimal. Except for his rookie year, when he was shut down, and last year's trip to the DL, he's made at least 32 starts each season. He's been a horse. I still can't get over how many posters wanted a total rebuild, yet have absolutely zero patience. s*** happens. Hopefully, there is no damage in Danks' shoulder. If there is not, there's no reason to think he won't be a real good pitcher the next several seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 01:10 PM) Danks isn't getting paid all that much this year. Next year is when the big bucks start rolling in. Its always a gamble to give any pitcher 4 or 5 or even more years. So far it looks like a mistake, but judging it now is so silly its beyond ridiculous. I wish the Sox brought back Buerhle. He was willing to take less than he received, yet there was no offer, and considering they were trying to throw some money Soler's way, its apparent the checking account wasn't as low as they have expertly have it perceived. But signing Danks is a decent move. You win with pitching. He's young, and up until now has been very healthy. He had a circulation problem several years ago that was cleared up quickly, and last year had a rib cage injury. So the injury concern was minimal. Except for his rookie year, when he was shut down, and last year's trip to the DL, he's made at least 32 starts each season. He's been a horse. I still can't get over how many posters wanted a total rebuild, yet have absolutely zero patience. s*** happens. Hopefully, there is no damage in Danks' shoulder. If there is not, there's no reason to think he won't be a real good pitcher the next several seasons. Mark Buehrle wasn't going to leave $20 million on the table to stay in Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty34 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 12:10 PM) Danks isn't getting paid all that much this year. Next year is when the big bucks start rolling in. Its always a gamble to give any pitcher 4 or 5 or even more years. So far it looks like a mistake, but judging it now is so silly its beyond ridiculous. I wish the Sox brought back Buerhle. He was willing to take less than he received, yet there was no offer, and considering they were trying to throw some money Soler's way, its apparent the checking account wasn't as low as they have expertly have it perceived. But signing Danks is a decent move. You win with pitching. He's young, and up until now has been very healthy. He had a circulation problem several years ago that was cleared up quickly, and last year had a rib cage injury. So the injury concern was minimal. Except for his rookie year, when he was shut down, and last year's trip to the DL, he's made at least 32 starts each season. He's been a horse. I still can't get over how many posters wanted a total rebuild, yet have absolutely zero patience. s*** happens. Hopefully, there is no damage in Danks' shoulder. If there is not, there's no reason to think he won't be a real good pitcher the next several seasons. Danks is getting paid #2-type money and I think you need two starters better than Danks to win a WS. Sox fans love him because of game 163 vs. Twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) Mark Buehrle wasn't going to leave $20 million on the table to stay in Chicago. Who said he would, but why not throw out your best shot? I actually think Buerhle leaving was the last straw for many season ticket accounts. Obviously, attendance has been trending down for quite some time, but I'd bet if Buerhle stayed, the Sox attendance would be up at least 1000 a game. 81000 x $50 a very conservate number for ticket, parking, concession and souvenier is still $4 million a year. Multiply that by 4 years and what they offered Soler plus just a reasonable estimate what the collateral damage was not bringing back Buerhle was, and you're pretty close. Plus, with Peavy coming off the books, the future money shouldn't be prohibitive. Also, it would have freed KW to trade either Danks or Floyd last winter, even if he was serious about competing in 2012. Maybe the plan all along was to either get someone to overpay for Danks or sign him. If Sox fans have a problem with Danks getting extended, they will have a problem with just about anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) Danks is getting paid #2-type money and I think you need two starters better than Danks to win a WS. Sox fans love him because of game 163 vs. Twins. That game was fine, but I love him because he should be entering his prime and he's put up several real good seasons, and I don't think he's reached his best yet. Right now, the Sox probably have 2 starters better than Danks in Sale and Peavy. Sale's dominated, Peavy has looked like a guy who has won a Cy Young. I think Danks is going to step up when he returns, assuming he is healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 01:32 PM) Who said he would, but why not throw out your best shot? I actually think Buerhle leaving was the last straw for many season ticket accounts. Obviously, attendance has been trending down for quite some time, but I'd bet if Buerhle stayed, the Sox attendance would be up at least 1000 a game. 81000 x $50 a very conservate number for ticket, parking, concession and souvenier is still $4 million a year. Multiply that by 4 years and what they offered Soler plus just a reasonable estimate what the collateral damage was not bringing back Buerhle was, and you're pretty close. Plus, with Peavy coming off the books, the future money shouldn't be prohibitive. Also, it would have freed KW to trade either Danks or Floyd last winter, even if he was serious about competing in 2012. Maybe the plan all along was to either get someone to overpay for Danks or sign him. If Sox fans have a problem with Danks getting extended, they will have a problem with just about anything. Frankly, I don't believe any of that. The last straw was being a below .500 team last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 12:32 PM) Who said he would, but why not throw out your best shot? I actually think Buerhle leaving was the last straw for many season ticket accounts. Obviously, attendance has been trending down for quite some time, but I'd bet if Buerhle stayed, the Sox attendance would be up at least 1000 a game. 81000 x $50 a very conservate number for ticket, parking, concession and souvenier is still $4 million a year. Multiply that by 4 years and what they offered Soler plus just a reasonable estimate what the collateral damage was not bringing back Buerhle was, and you're pretty close. Plus, with Peavy coming off the books, the future money shouldn't be prohibitive. Also, it would have freed KW to trade either Danks or Floyd last winter, even if he was serious about competing in 2012. Maybe the plan all along was to either get someone to overpay for Danks or sign him. If Sox fans have a problem with Danks getting extended, they will have a problem with just about anything. I can't believe 1000 people would come just to see Mark Buehrle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPN366 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 11:47 AM) What's the latest on the Danks injury? It's not good when a rehab assignment ends prematurely. Pitchers get up to 30 days for rehab assignments. Morel had 11 days left on his rehab assigment alotted time when his ended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 17, 2012 -> 12:43 PM) I can't believe 1000 people would come just to see Mark Buehrle. That's not what I'm saying. I think losing Buerhle was the final straw for many people with season tickets as far as renewal and hurt pre season sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Not signing Mark was a slap in the face to all loyal fans. Keep Mark, sign Danks. Chicago is a big market team. 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.