Baron Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:19 AM) He's not going to get hurt starting a game. Uh.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 http://nypost.com/2014/07/31/yankees-talki...dium=SocialFlow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:18 AM) New York Post just posted an article about the Yankees-White Sox Linkdiscussing Danks and Dayan. Link please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate Champion Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:18 AM) New York Post just posted an article about the Yankees-White Sox discussing Danks and Dayan. I'd much, much rather have Maurer from Seattle than any of the Yanks catchers. JMO but if Coop could fix 'em? Yeesh, we'd get a nice piece for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 07:14 AM) I very strongly diagree with the bolded. We're still a few core pieces away from being at that point. Maybe a couple of them will come in-house, like a 2B for one, but we won't know until they are here showing themselves as MLB ballplayers. For all purposes we're a contender no sooner than 2016, that's how we should approach the deadline & offseason. Danks is a back end starter getting paid like a mid-rotation starter. There are several contracts that are worse, and Danks isn't too much of an overpayment, and Danks *could* even perform up to his deal or even slightly exceed it assuming he continues to develop into a different type of pitcher. But I'm not seeing any leverage here in possessing a likely back-end SP at market value or above that isn't in demand. If there's no real demand where does our leverage come from? No we don't *have* to trade Danks but if we pass this up and keep him we could really end up regretting it. The Yanks are in a tough spot ATM where they need SP and can't afford much, and so maybe the extent of our leverage in negotiations is forcing them to take on at least 90% or more of the remaining deal. Maybe there's a good amount of leverage in that. You're assuming we could just basically give the Danks contract to the Yankees and they would take him off our hands, like Rios when KW claimed him off waivers. I think if that was the case, Hahn would let him go in a heartbeat. I don't understand why we would have much leverage with the Astros flooding the market with their top 3 starters...and the Yankees already having picked up Capuano and McCarthy. The only real leverage we have is working against us, those other AL East teams (Blue Jays, Orioles) knowing that Lester is out there and that the Red Sox don't want him to go to the Yankees. Especially if Hamels is off the market...looks like the Rays will hold onto Price until the off-season or next trade deadline. Edited July 31, 2014 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate Champion Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Baron @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:20 AM) Uh.... He hasn't gotten hurt starting any of the other games he's made this year. Maybe we should tie him to a pole and wrap him in bubble wrap, tell him "you stay right here & eat rice cakes I don't want you getting hurt in case we trade you! No human contact either what if you get a cough?" I'm willing to bet Danks won't get hurt today. Edited July 31, 2014 by The Ultimate Champion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:22 AM) I'd much, much rather have Maurer from Seattle than any of the Yanks catchers. JMO but if Coop could fix 'em? Yeesh, we'd get a nice piece for sure. Can you imagine Dayan at Safeco? Yeah that's not happening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 I think yankees trying give us Francisco Cervelli instead murphy or gary Sanchez and rick hahn wants one or sanchez or murphy not Francisco Cervelli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate Champion Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:24 AM) You're assuming we could just basically give the Danks contract to the Yankees and they would take him off our hands, like Rios when KW claimed him off waivers. I think if that was the case, Hahn would let him go in a heartbeat. I don't understand why we would have much leverage with the Astros flooding the market with their top 3 starters...and the Yankees already having picked up Capuano and McCarthy. The only real leverage we have is working against us, those other AL East teams (Blue Jays, Orioles) knowing that Lester is out there and that the Red Sox don't want him to go to the Yankees. The Rays seemingly are going to hold onto price until next year at the deadline or at least the offseason. Especially if Hamels is off the market... That seems to be the case to you, doesn't it? The Yanks don't want to give up much & why are we going to eat a ton of cash just to get nothing in return? Maybe that's what the Marlins stuff is about, we're telling the Yanks that if you want us to eat a good amuont of cash we will need something back, and if you want to givew up squat you're going to be taking this contract. 3 pitchers the Astros will trade, Brandon McCarthy and Chris Capuano... you just right there named why the Yanks like Danks. Danks is a veteran and a model of health, AL performance, and consistency compared to those guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) If the yankees dont wanna eat money they won't get danks and we trade him in the offseason Edited July 31, 2014 by peavy44 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:10 AM) No one wants beckham maybe in august he be gone Not entirely true. Teams like SF have an interest in Beckham. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 (edited) IMO, the bluff for Danks ends at gametime. If he is starting, he's not getting traded today. Even if he doesn't start, he may not, but not only for injury purposes, a team acquiring him wouldn't be able to use him for 5 days. If something is anywhere near close, I'm thinking they at the very least push him back. I still don't think today's deadline means all that much to the White Sox in terms of who they are trading. Their guys shouldn't have a problem getting through waivers and if they don't, they may let them go anyway. Edited July 31, 2014 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:24 AM) You're assuming we could just basically give the Danks contract to the Yankees and they would take him off our hands, like Rios when KW claimed him off waivers. I think if that was the case, Hahn would let him go in a heartbeat. I don't understand why we would have much leverage with the Astros flooding the market with their top 3 starters...and the Yankees already having picked up Capuano and McCarthy. The only real leverage we have is working against us, those other AL East teams (Blue Jays, Orioles) knowing that Lester is out there and that the Red Sox don't want him to go to the Yankees. Especially if Hamels is off the market...looks like the Rays will hold onto Price until the off-season or next trade deadline. The Sox leverage is that they won't require near the talent to acquire Danks as the Astros will to acquire their's and he may be just as good, but he does cost more monetarily. As long as Danks represents an upgrade to a team's rotation, the immediate interest is worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:31 AM) Not entirely true. Teams like SF have an interest in Beckham. So what's the story with things today Rock? What going on with Danks because it seems to be mixed signals right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate Champion Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (peavy44 @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:27 AM) I think yankees trying give us Francisco Cervelli instead murphy or gary Sanchez and rick hahn wants one or sanchez or murphy not Francisco Cervelli That sounds very possible. Or maybe the Yanks are saying "we will give you Cerveilli but we want you to eat $2M per year" at which point we're countering with MAurphy, getting the Yanks involved in trying to add Dayan to the deal, etc. I think if it happens it'll probably be a straight dump like Cervelli comes here and we eat less than 3-4M in total. I bet the Yanks are getting a good deal of money back on insurance this year with all their high dollar injuries. They can afford Danks & Hahn knows it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peavy44 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:31 AM) Not entirely true. Teams like SF have an interest in Beckham. No one wants Beckham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtySox Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:31 AM) Not entirely true. Teams like SF have an interest in Beckham. Any other balls in the air? Dunn? Alexei? Appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ultimate Champion Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:32 AM) IMO, the bluff for Danks ends at gametime. If he is starting, he's not getting traded today. Even if he doesn't start, he may not, but not only for injury purposes, a team acquiring him wouldn't be able to use him for 5 days. If something is anywhere near close, I'm thinking they at the very least push him back. I still don't think today's deadline means all that much to the White Sox in terms of who they are trading. Their guys shouldn't have a problem getting through waivers and if they don't, they may let them go anyway. So it's 1:30pm and Danks is on his way back out for the 5th and the Yanks agree to the package then. You don't think Hahn calls Robin and says to pull him? I think you're crazy. If the Yanks meet the Sox (proabbly small) asking price he will be traded today whether he starts or not. He's not fine china he doesn't need to be withheld from anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:14 AM) I very strongly diagree with the bolded. We're still a few core pieces away from being at that point. Maybe a couple of them will come in-house, like a 2B for one, but we won't know until they are here showing themselves as MLB ballplayers. For all purposes we're a contender no sooner than 2016, that's how we should approach the deadline & offseason. Danks is a back end starter getting paid like a mid-rotation starter. There are several contracts that are worse, and Danks isn't too much of an overpayment, and Danks *could* even perform up to his deal or even slightly exceed it assuming he continues to develop into a different type of pitcher. But I'm not seeing any leverage here in possessing a likely back-end SP at market value or above that isn't in demand. If there's no real demand where does our leverage come from? No we don't *have* to trade Danks but if we pass this up and keep him we could really end up regretting it. The Yanks are in a tough spot ATM where they need SP and can't afford much, and so maybe the extent of our leverage in negotiations is forcing them to take on at least 90% or more of the remaining deal. Maybe there's a good amount of leverage in that. If teams are offering nothing of value, there is no regretting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Aaron Hill, Chase Utley or Martin Prado...all of those guys are a lot more interesting to the Giants than Beckham, and they're all familiar with the NL West/NL in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:31 AM) Not entirely true. Teams like SF have an interest in Beckham. He'd actually be an upgrade over Dan Uggla. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2nd_city_saint787 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:14 AM) I very strongly diagree with the bolded. We're still a few core pieces away from being at that point. Maybe a couple of them will come in-house, like a 2B for one, but we won't know until they are here showing themselves as MLB ballplayers. For all purposes we're a contender no sooner than 2016, that's how we should approach the deadline & offseason. Danks is a back end starter getting paid like a mid-rotation starter. There are several contracts that are worse, and Danks isn't too much of an overpayment, and Danks *could* even perform up to his deal or even slightly exceed it assuming he continues to develop into a different type of pitcher. But I'm not seeing any leverage here in possessing a likely back-end SP at market value or above that isn't in demand. If there's no real demand where does our leverage come from? No we don't *have* to trade Danks but if we pass this up and keep him we could really end up regretting it. The Yanks are in a tough spot ATM where they need SP and can't afford much, and so maybe the extent of our leverage in negotiations is forcing them to take on at least 90% or more of the remaining deal. Maybe there's a good amount of leverage in that. I of course disagree. Maybe not a title contender, but certainly a playoff contender IMO. Really think adding Avi and Semien/Johnson alone will make a huge difference for the offense and I envision Hahn adding a FA bat, SP, and some bullpen help. I don't mind the whole "Danks is a backend starter getting paid like a mid rotation starter" simply because the Sox have 2 front line starters that are being paid like 3/4s. Even adding a huge SP contract to go along with Danks would not even put the Sox close to the Phillies and Dodgers of the worlds in terms of SP contracts. Like others have said, he has much more value to the Sox than he does any other team. At the very least the longer you keep him, as long as he doesn't get hurt or starts getting hit around more than just a few times a year, the more valuable he potentially becomes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 One of the best deadlines was 2004. I was watching ESPN as the clock struck zero. It's when the Cubs got Nomar and the Sox picked up Contreras. There was a flury in the last hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Jul 31, 2014 -> 08:24 AM) He hasn't gotten hurt starting any of the other games he's made this year. Maybe we should tie him to a pole and wrap him in bubble wrap, tell him "you stay right here & eat rice cakes I don't want you getting hurt in case we trade you! No human contact either what if you get a cough?" I'm willing to bet Danks won't get hurt today. The odds of Danks getting hurt today are slim to none, but why even risk it if you a think a trade is near? The Red Sox scratched Jon Lester, the Cubs kept Bonaficio out of the lineup, why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Well Lester was traded to someone 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.