Quin Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 12:09 PM) John Danks for Ethier and cash makes a bunch of sense, then. I could get behind this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:19 PM) I could get behind this. Financially, it could be Danks + Dunn for Ethier + 14 mil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 12:34 PM) Financially, it could be Danks + Dunn for Ethier + 14 mil. Even better sounding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:39 PM) Even better sounding Dodgers would have to deal Dunn to a 3rd team, most likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 Because Dunn's not going to be taking Adrian Gonzales or Ethier/Crawford's position away any time soon. The Dodgers have Kershaw, Greinke, Ryu, Nolasco and Capuano, who's essentially a cheaper version of Danks (2 years/$10 million, plus there are options if they want to keep him for 2014). So why would they want Danks over Ricky Nolasco, who's a FA after this season, and they already have another version of Danks in Chris Capuano for a much more affordable price and not stuck paying him for 3 more years. Why wouldn't they just go after David Price or give Tim Lincecum a one year deal with lots of incentives?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 12:09 PM) John Danks for Ethier and cash makes a bunch of sense, then. Now we have returned to the land of reality in fantasy trade theater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:23 PM) Now we have returned to the land of reality in fantasy trade theater. Closer to this land, yes, but why would the Dodgers want Danks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:26 PM) Closer to this land, yes, but why would the Dodgers want Danks? Maybe not for detail, but for the type of trade that would be done involving the Sox and big contracts. They aren't paying nine figures for a prospect. They would deal bad contract for bad contract, or they would take a bad contract if they got a ton of money in the deal to fill a position of need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 02:26 PM) Closer to this land, yes, but why would the Dodgers want Danks? They genuinely do appear to need back of the rotation pitching. Regardless of having an option on Capuano, the back of their rotation was a weakness this year. A guy who has a track record, could be had for nothing but dollars, and all of the other things Danks could bring, does fir their needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted October 10, 2013 Share Posted October 10, 2013 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 01:23 PM) Now we have returned to the land of reality in fantasy trade theater. I think it's actually a good idea. You're trading your bloat for theirs and it has the potential to be a trade that really works for both teams. I'm not sure if its realistic, but I like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 What good is Sox offseason, if we can't sign more declining veterans that Williams fell in love with 5 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 Steve Stone thinks Danks will add 2-4 MPH on his fastball in 2014 and be a much better pitcher. Might be right. If Dodgers believe that, then he is very tradable. Ethier would help. He certainly is a better player than Dunn, and all you guys loved it when we signed him for 4 years for about the same $$ Ethier is due thru 2017. Ethier would help the Sox. Maybe Hahn can get more from LA, especially if they sign Cano. If Danks has another bad year in 2014, then he will have no value for rest of his contract. Hahn should find out what kind of value he has now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 08:44 PM) Steve Stone thinks Danks will add 2-4 MPH on his fastball in 2014 and be a much better pitcher. Might be right. If Dodgers believe that, then he is very tradable. Ethier would help. He certainly is a better player than Dunn, and all you guys loved it when we signed him for 4 years for about the same $$ Ethier is due thru 2017. Ethier would help the Sox. Maybe Hahn can get more from LA, especially if they sign Cano. If Danks has another bad year in 2014, then he will have no value for rest of his contract. Hahn should find out what kind of value he has now. Ether right now is not a better player than Dunn was when he was signed. At least not a better hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 They're not going to trade for Danks based the the PREMISE he's going to add 2-4 MPH. He's going to have to prove that he can do that, and, in that case, he might become valuable to the White Sox again as one of the anchors of their rotation. Not sure that Ethier makes us much better...or how he does. Now if we were trading for the equivalent of Andre Ethier and he played 3B, CF, 2B, 1B or catcher, okay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 07:02 PM) Ether right now is not a better player than Dunn was when he was signed. At least not a better hitter. Nonsense. I remember watching Dunn try to play the outfield with Nats in 2010. What a joke. An embarassment. Plus he struck out about 200 times. Then in 2011 he hit .159 for Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hi8is Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 07:27 PM) Then in 2011 he hit .159 for Sox. Best year ever!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (oldsox @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 09:27 PM) Nonsense. I remember watching Dunn try to play the outfield with Nats in 2010. What a joke. An embarassment. Plus he struck out about 200 times. Then in 2011 he hit .159 for Sox. And 2 years later he has proven that 2011 was a complete aberration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 11:25 PM) And 2 years later he has proven that 2011 was a complete aberration. I don't know about that, either. He's been "somewhat productive," but not nearly to the level he was for the previous 5-7 years when he was in his NL prime. Neither one is a good or safe investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 10, 2013 -> 08:55 PM) They're not going to trade for Danks based the the PREMISE he's going to add 2-4 MPH. He's going to have to prove that he can do that, and, in that case, he might become valuable to the White Sox again as one of the anchors of their rotation. Not sure that Ethier makes us much better...or how he does. Now if we were trading for the equivalent of Andre Ethier and he played 3B, CF, 2B, 1B or catcher, okay. He can probably play First Base, and better than most of our other options there, assumiing PK does not return. Plus, that would keep the slug off the field, except when he strikes out 200 times a year as DH. Ethier makes the team better and more flexible, since he can play outfield, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 01:09 AM) I don't know about that, either. He's been "somewhat productive," but not nearly to the level he was for the previous 5-7 years when he was in his NL prime. Neither one is a good or safe investment. No, he has proven that 2011 was a complete abberation. Arguing that is like arguing that the color black is really purple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 07:59 AM) No, he has proven that 2011 was a complete abberation. Arguing that is like arguing that the color black is really purple. I wouldn't say complete aberration. He still goes through rather long stretches where he looks like he is back to that. He obviously has made himself useful again, and hopefully the real nice stretch he sandwiched between a couple of extended 2011-like stretches he had this year, is what he can be next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 08:10 AM) I wouldn't say complete aberration. He still goes through rather long stretches where he looks like he is back to that. He obviously has made himself useful again, and hopefully the real nice stretch he sandwiched between a couple of extended 2011-like stretches he had this year, is what he can be next season. Every player goes through stretches where they look like dogs***. It was a complete abberation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 08:50 AM) Every player goes through stretches where they look like dogs***. It was a complete abberation. Obviously facts won't stand in your way. The last 3 months of 2012, combined, he hit below .200 with an OBP below .300, and had to be held out of the final game so he wouldn't establish a record for striking out in a season. Last year in April, May and September his highest average was .165, and highest OBP was .250. That is half a season. While players do fluctuate, he is abnormally bad for extremely long periods of time. He was extremely good the other 3 months of 2013, so he obviously has or at least had something left. To think anyone being reasonable would be shocked if Adam Dunn was that bad again is a reach. Edited October 11, 2013 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 09:06 AM) Obviously facts won't stand in your way. The last 3 months of 2012, combined, he hit below .200 with an OBP below .300, and had to be held out of the final game so he wouldn't establish a record for striking out in a season. Last year in April, May and September his highest average was .165, and highest OBP was .250. That is half a season. While players do fluctuate, he is abnormally bad for extremely long periods of time. He was extremely good the other 3 months of 2013, so he obviously has or at least had something left. To think anyone being reasonable would be shocked if Adam Dunn was that bad again is a reach. In 2011, he had 6 months where he played like that. It was a complete abberation. He is an incredibly streaky player, but 2011 is in a league all of its own. To say it wasn't an abberation is to say that Adam Dunn is not only "capable" but is, in fact, likely to put up a .159 BA and .569 OPS again over the course of a full season. Are you arguing that, or are you arguing that he's a streaky player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted October 11, 2013 Share Posted October 11, 2013 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 11, 2013 -> 09:06 AM) Obviously facts won't stand in your way. The last 3 months of 2012, combined, he hit below .200 with an OBP below .300, and had to be held out of the final game so he wouldn't establish a record for striking out in a season. Last year in April, May and September his highest average was .165, and highest OBP was .250. That is half a season. While players do fluctuate, he is abnormally bad for extremely long periods of time. He was extremely good the other 3 months of 2013, so he obviously has or at least had something left. To think anyone being reasonable would be shocked if Adam Dunn was that bad again is a reach. The facts are in the last 2 full seasons he's come no where near that garbage year of 2011. You can cherry pick stats all you want but the fact is 2011 was clearly a complete aberration. 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.