Hahn- Deal could happen before Aug 31

[shysocks]

There's just no way they get THAT desperate.

 

I think they'd almost rather go back to Joe Saunders again than take on Danks' financial commitment.

 

There were at least ten starting pitchers who moved the last 10 days of July and in August so far that fit that requirement of expiring contracts/veteran pitchers/lower-risk deals.

 

 

If we were talking about Danks at the beginning of July, then it could be a legit conversation. But not right now.

That's the key. Danks right now is a replacement-level pitcher, and by definition that means the Angels have somebody they'd rather plug in who is a lot cheaper and not signed for two more years.

 

Not only that, but it seems like he might be wearing out and provide even less in September.

[southsider2k5]

I don't want Hamilton but the guy is a left-handed outfielder/DH that is out of sorts with his team. Obviously if you're trading for the guy you're betting on him returning to pre-2013 form but that's not a bet I'd be willing to make. If the Angels paid for him to play for the Sox I might be open to it.

 

He fits what the team needs, very badly. I just don't see the Sox being willing to take that kind of gamble.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Sadly, and I say this as one of Danks biggest supporters, Danks isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Maybe at the trade deadline next season when he'll only be due ~20M and the Sox pitch in a good portion of that he might be traded, but right now it's not gonna happen.

 

IMO, him being here next season won't be that big a deal. Sox have plenty of money to play with even with him on the roster and he can still give you some quality innings. He's not blocking Rodon from starting, and guys like Beck and Bassit are still half a season away. Only guy he might be "blocking" is Noesi and that's only if the Sox feel like they should go after a guy like Shields/Masterson etc.

 

 

[Dick Allen]

The USCF gun had him at 90-92 his last start. I don't think Danks is done. I don't think anyone is going to trade for him, unless you take back some expensive garbage, but there are worse things than having him around next year.

[southsider2k5]

He fits what the team needs, very badly. I just don't see the Sox being willing to take that kind of gamble.

 

As a follow up, here are the remaining three years on the deal.

 

2015 $23 million

2016 $30 million

2017 $30 million

 

Plus these kickers... On each June 1 of the contract, the Angels will donate $400,000 to Hamilton's charity. Each ASG he gets $50k, GG $75k, Silver Slugger $75k, Playoff MVP $75k, World Series MVP $100k, 2nd or 3rd for MVP $75k, MVP $500k.

 

That is $84.2 million at the bare minimum for the next three years.

[2nd_city_saint787]

I don't want Hamilton but the guy is a left-handed outfielder/DH that is out of sorts with his team. Obviously if you're trading for the guy you're betting on him returning to pre-2013 form but that's not a bet I'd be willing to make. If the Angels paid for him to play for the Sox I might be open to it.

 

I was just about to say I'd love to take that risk (I've read his book a few times and really root for the guy) but holy back loaded contracts batman! Dudes contract jums from 17M this year to '15- 35M, '16-32M, '17- 32M..... That is a boatload of cash.

 

EDIT- Based off 2k5s post, those numbers must be the max he can earn.

Edited August 21, 2014 by scs787

[southsider2k5]

This is my source...

 

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/story/_...123-million-mlb

[2nd_city_saint787]

Ha, we were all on the same page here. Not sure why my salaries and SS2K5's are different. I used BBR and got 25 mil, 32 mil and 32 mil for '15, '16 and '17. I am sure you used Cots?

 

Anyways, the Angels look like they'll at least be talking about moving Hamilton this offseason. I wonder how much money they'll kick in. Even if their conversations aren't with the Sox I'd be very curious to see how much cash they'd tie to him. Assuming he is owed 89 million base, what would the kicker be? At least 40 million I'd guess.

 

I used Rotoworld.

 

If they kicked in 40M, that'd be ~16M a year, I think I'd take the risk on him.

 

Or perhaps they take on all of Danks 31M and send back 10-20M on top of it.

[Chicago White Sox]

The USCF gun had him at 90-92 his last start. I don't think Danks is done. I don't think anyone is going to trade for him, unless you take back some expensive garbage, but there are worse things than having him around next year.

His average velocity has been at 90 or above in two of his last three starts. That's a 2-3 MPH improvement from where he's been most of the year.

 

If he can be in the low 90s next year, I have no doubt he can be a valuable starter for us. I'm just not sure that's a reasonable expectation at this point.

[southsider2k5]

I used Rotoworld.

 

If they kicked in 40M, that'd be ~16M a year, I think I'd take the risk on him.

 

Or perhaps they take on all of Danks 31M and send back 10-20M on top of it.

 

The back year of those deals don't match up. So the Sox would be looking for money for covering that last $30 million, at the very least. John Danks is $14.25 million the next two years.

 

That makes the differences (again at the very least)

 

2015 $9.15 million

2016 $16.15 million

2017 $30.4 million

[ptatc]

His average velocity has been at 90 or above in two of his last three starts. That's a 2-3 MPH improvement from where he's been most of the year.

 

If he can be in the low 90s next year, I have no doubt he can be a valuable starter for us. I'm just not sure that's a reasonable expectation at this point.

The problem is his command has been off as well. I wonder if he is trying to overthrow and it's causing the problems.

[southsider2k5]

The problem is his command has been off as well. I wonder if he is trying to overthrow and it's causing the problems.

 

He has had big problems getting the ball down for multiple starts now.

[ptatc]

He has had big problems getting the ball down for multiple starts now.

The pitch with the greatest velocity is the 4 seamer up in the zone.

[2nd_city_saint787]

The back year of those deals don't match up. So the Sox would be looking for money for covering that last $30 million, at the very least. John Danks is $14.25 million the next two years.

 

That makes the differences (again at the very least)

 

2015 $9.15 million

2016 $16.15 million

2017 $30.4 million

 

Ya, I think I'd be happy with 20M on top of taking Danks. If Hahn and JR really wanna contend I could see that payroll up over 100M come 2017.

 

 

I still like Danks though. Think he's a quality #4/5. It just sucks that he's paid so much. If he can just avoid the big games, he has had 4 of em, his numbers would still look halfway decent.

[shysocks]

Can't this be said about almost any pitcher...

Yes, this was a discussion that was had in great deal before the July 31 deadline. In 25 starts now, Danks has given up 6 earned runs or more 5 times. Take away the worst 20% of his season and he's doing pretty okay*!

 

*3.27 ERA, 1.24 WHIP, 80/43 K/BB

Edited August 21, 2014 by shysocks

[caulfield12]

Ya, I think I'd be happy with 20M on top of taking Danks. If Hahn and JR really wanna contend I could see that payroll up over 100M come 2017.

 

 

I still like Danks though. Think he's a quality #4/5. It just sucks that he's paid so much. If he can just avoid the big games, he has had 4 of em, his numbers would still look halfway decent.

 

 

We very easily could end up 28th in payroll next year (which is fitting, since that's where attendance is as well).

 

That's an amazing turnaround from 2006-2013.

http://www.gammonsdaily.com/2014-mlb-opening-day-payrolls/

 

 

The bottom of the Top 10 payrolls right now is around $130 million.

Edited August 21, 2014 by caulfield12

[2nd_city_saint787]

Can't this be said about almost any pitcher...

 

Yes, but I'd still take a pitcher, as 4/5, who can give you decent starts most of the time.

 

I made a mistake, he's had 5 reallly bad games where he gave up 37 runs in 23.2 IP. In his other 20 starts he has an ERA of 3.27.

 

I know people say that doesn't really matter, I'm just cherry picking, and it makes no sense, but to me it does.

[Chicago White Sox]

Yes, but I'd still take a pitcher, as 4/5, who can give you decent starts most of the time.

 

I made a mistake, he's had 5 reallly bad games where he gave up 37 runs in 23.2 IP. In his other 20 starts he has an ERA of 3.27.

 

I know people say that doesn't really matter, I'm just cherry picking, and it makes no sense, but to me it does.

It only makes sense if you can show us how the rest of the league looks when you take away their worst starts. If the delta between Danks and the rest of the league remains the same, then your argument goes out the window. I have a feeling most starters would benefit similarly if you removed the worst 20% of their starts.

[witesoxfan]

We very easily could end up 28th in payroll next year (which is fitting, since that's where attendance is as well).

 

You seriously expect the White Sox to spend absolutely no money at all this offseason? A team whose payroll was last below $65 million more than 10 years ago, will go into next year with a $48 million payroll?

 

You have said and suggested some ridiculous s*** and this is right up there with it.

 

AND QUIT WITH THIS ATTENDANCE BULLs*** AS IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO CORRELATION BETWEEN PAYROLL AND SPENDING

[caulfield12]

You seriously expect the White Sox to spend absolutely no money at all this offseason? A team whose payroll was last below $65 million more than 10 years ago, will go into next year with a $48 million payroll?

 

You have said and suggested some ridiculous s*** and this is right up there with it.

 

AND QUIT WITH THIS ATTENDANCE BULLs*** AS IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO CORRELATION BETWEEN PAYROLL AND SPENDING

 

 

So you're willing to wager they are going to spend $77-80 million or more on payroll next year?

 

Because that's what you are arguing. NOTICE I DIDN'T SAY SPEND ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY. WHERE ARE YOU READING THAT?

 

As we've been repeating for months and months, we could easily be around $45-50 million next year without doing anything. In fact, we could actually be lower if we dumped Danks and traded Alexei Ramirez, not to mention you're going to be subtracting Belisario, Beckham, DeAza and probably Dayan Viciedo.

 

If they did spend around $80 million, that would barely put them at 25th-27th. Arguably. Since we don't know what those teams are going to do for 2015, although we have a pretty good range or idea.

 

As far as your last point, that WAS true for most of the last ten years, attendance ranking lagged payroll spending significantly, without correcting for higher ticket prices, parking, etc. I'm sure this is the closest (next year) these two numbers will have ever aligned together since the 1980's.

Edited August 21, 2014 by caulfield12

[2nd_city_saint787]

It only makes sense if you can show us how the rest of the league looks when you take away their worst starts. If the delta between Danks and the rest of the league remains the same, then your argument goes out the window. I have a feeling most starters would benefit similarly if you removed the worst 20% of their starts.

 

I'm not disagreeing with the bold. All I'm saying is in 80% of his starts he's been serviceable. Period. And as a 4/5 starter, I'm fine with that. Only thing that sucks is he isn't getting paid like a 4/5.

 

Just for funsies though, I'll do it to a guy a lot of people bring up, Edwin Jackson...Take out his 5 best starts and he has a 4.37 ERA.

Edited August 21, 2014 by scs787

[caulfield12]

I'm not disagreeing with the bold. All I'm saying is in 80% of his starts he's been serviceable. Period. And as a 4/5 starter, I'm fine with that.

 

Just for funsies though, I'll do it to a guy a lot of people bring up, Edwin Jackson...Take out his 5 best starts and he has a 4.37 ERA.

 

 

And those are absolutely acceptable numbers for Hector Noesi or Scott Carroll, but certainly not someone being paid $13-15 million per season.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, but I'd still take a pitcher, as 4/5, who can give you decent starts most of the time.

 

I made a mistake, he's had 5 reallly bad games where he gave up 37 runs in 23.2 IP. In his other 20 starts he has an ERA of 3.27.

 

I know people say that doesn't really matter, I'm just cherry picking, and it makes no sense, but to me it does.

 

Danks has absolutely gone into the tank over the last month. I think Ptatc is on to something with some fatigue issues either causing bad mechanics or overthrowing to make up for it. He hasn't be mechanically right for a while now.

[2nd_city_saint787]

And those are absolutely acceptable numbers for Hector Noesi or Scott Carroll, but certainly not someone being paid $13-15 million per season.

 

I added the caveat of the sucktitude of him not being paid like a 4/5 to my post right as you made this. I agree.

 

We have 2 top of the rotation starters that are being paid like mid/back end guys so it kinda evens out in the end......

 

I'm not saying I wouldn't love to trade him, simply that I believe him being in the rotation is not THAT big a deal.

[witesoxfan]

So you're willing to wager they are going to spend $77-80 million or more on payroll next year?

 

Because that's what you are arguing. NOTICE I DIDN'T SAY SPEND ABSOLUTELY NO MONEY. WHERE ARE YOU READING THAT?

 

As we've been repeating for months and months, we could easily be around $45-50 million next year without doing anything. In fact, we could actually be lower if we dumped Danks and traded Alexei Ramirez, not to mention you're going to be subtracting Belisario, Beckham, DeAza and probably Dayan Viciedo.

 

If they did spend around $80 million, that would barely put them at 25th-27th. Arguably. Since we don't know what those teams are going to do for 2015, although we have a pretty good range or idea.

 

As far as your last point, that WAS true for most of the last ten years, attendance ranking lagged payroll spending significantly, without correcting for higher ticket prices, parking, etc. I'm sure this is the closest (next year) these two numbers will have ever aligned together since the 1980's.

 

I believe 100% that they will spend $70-80 million on their payroll next year.

 

Their payroll commitments currently are $45.4 million. This does not include De Aza, Beckham, Belisario, Viciedo, Flowers, Jones, or Noesi, who are all arbitration eligible players, nor does it include pre-arb players. Beckham and Belisario will certainly not be back, and Flowers and Jones' raises will be slight but still signficant. De Aza and Viciedo certainly could be non-tendered as well, or they could be kept. Regardless of what they do (I believe they'll trade both De Aza and Viciedo), they still have to replace that production in LF, and given the strides the team made this year - that they may be closer than they think, but with an ultimate goal for 2016 - they certainly aren't going to go with Michael Taylor, Jordan Danks, and Moises Sierra in LF. They likely have a replacement at 2B within the system. They could also justifiably bring in a catcher too and they will do something to address the DH situation too (whether that's internally or not). They will also need bullpen arms, and after this disaster of a season, you can believe they aren't going to go with Taylor Thompson and Andre Rienzo as options out of the bullpen.

 

You figure all of that, and you are talking about adding $25-35 million between all of it at bare minimum. Where does that put the Sox payroll?