Priority 1 / Priority 2 / Priority 3

[LDF]

Sox have 2 holes in the rotation, not 3.

Noesi and/or Danks can handle the #5 position. Noesi did it admirably last season

I'd go after a mid-tier pitcher who appears to be a ground ball pitcher like McCarthy.

 

After this year, the price of relief pitchers is going to be so high that I wish the Sox had some to deal. I think Carroll can be a good reliever.

Sign 1 but be careful.

 

call me a skeptic, I don't like the idea of having no one behind to back up and / or

start. have a options available that can help. the system is not ready to call someone

up and start. the sox should not ASSUME any 1 pitcher is ready to step up. come

spring that might be a different opinion.

[Balta1701]

call me a skeptic, I don't like the idea of having no one behind to back up and / or

start. have a options available that can help. the system is not ready to call someone

up and start. the sox should not ASSUME any 1 pitcher is ready to step up. come

spring that might be a different opinion.

Why not? Rodon, Bassitt, and Beck all pencil in as starting 2014 at Charlotte.

[LDF]

Why not? Rodon, Bassitt, and Beck all pencil in as starting 2014 at Charlotte.

 

Rodon - a lot been said about not rushing him now you have in pencil in?

 

Bassitt - 1 of my favorite players. plenty been said he is better or would be better

in the pen.

 

Beck - let see how he does in spring.

 

again I am not going to assume anything. I would hope for options, viable options.

[hi8is]

Priority 4) Trade Danks

[harfman77]

Teams use five starting pitchers and we have three holes. One, we're slotting Rodon into despite having no idea if he's going to earn it. Apparently we're also saving room for a whole bunch of prospects who are months, years, or forever away. If you can guarantee me that one of Bassitt, Beck, and Danish will be a valuable MLB starter in 2016, then I'll agree that we should play the sign-and-trade game, but I think you're really overrating the talent of those guys. There's room for a pitcher on a multi-year deal.

 

I don't agree with your premise that there are three holes in the rotation. I feel that we are sitting pretty good with four spots with Sale, Q, Noesi, and the Danks/Rodon spot. If Danks can get back to pitching as he did in the first half of the season than the Sox are sitting in a pretty good position. I would like to sign a guy to a short term deal to bridge the gap to Rodon and serve as insurance in case Danks does not improve. Beck and Bassit will likely be ready to crack the rotation mid-summer and if EJ recovers he will be ready before that, no reason to spend money to block them at this point.

 

Payroll space this season needs to be used to improve the lineup and team defense which will help to boost the rotation as well.

[Chicago White Sox]

My view on the rotation is to add the best RHP you can this offseason (within reason) and basically have Danks, Noesi, & Rodon compete for two spots during Spring Training. In a perfect world, all three guys look great and Rodon can spend April in Charlotte "working on things", which would give Danks and Noesi another month to be evaluated. If Rodon blows them out of the water, then I'm fine with the loser being forced into the bullpen to start the season.

 

What I don't want is to sign a some scrap heap starter that basically is filler until Rodon is ready. Strengthen the top three spots of the rotation by adding a good RHP or at least one with the potential to be like Masterson. Once comes Rodon comes up, I don't want more than one of Noesi or Danks in the rotation or the team will struggle to be competitive IMO.

[LDF]

My view on the rotation is to add the best RHP you can this offseason (within reason) and

basically have Danks, Noesi, & Rodon compete for two spots during Spring Training. In a perfect world, all three guys look great and Rodon can spend April in Charlotte "working on things", which would give Danks and Noesi another month to be evaluated. If Rodon blows them out of the water, then I'm fine with the loser being forced into the bullpen to start the season.

 

What I don't want is to sign a some scrap heap starter that basically is filler until Rodon is ready. Strengthen the top three spots of the rotation by adding a good RHP or at least one with the potential to be like Masterson. Once comes Rodon comes up, I don't want more than one of Noesi or Danks in the rotation or the team will struggle to be competitive IMO.

 

Noesi was on someone scrap when the sox claimed him.

 

I am not trying to argue this, but to point out, the sox pitching depth is

not so deep. the sox still can find gems on the waiver list and the non

tender list.

 

back that up with some fa signing and the sox can pull it off. the biggest

problem I am hoping that the sox not to fall in is being complacent like

last yr. not getting more options.

[LDF]

I don't agree with your premise that there are three holes in the rotation. I feel that we are sitting pretty good with four spots with Sale, Q, Noesi, and the Danks/Rodon spot. If Danks can get back to pitching as he did in the first half of the season than the Sox are sitting in a pretty good position. I would like to sign a guy to a short term deal to bridge the gap to Rodon and serve as insurance in case Danks does not improve. Beck and Bassit will likely be ready to crack the rotation mid-summer and if EJ recovers he will be ready before that, no reason to spend money to block them at this point.

 

Payroll space this season needs to be used to improve the lineup and team defense which will help to boost the rotation as well.

 

I agree, sign players who needs a yr or 2 to bring up their value. let the young

talent that the sox have to develop without rushing them.

 

the wildcard will be Rodon on 2 thngs, what was the handshake deal that

Hahn and his agent have. also how he does in spring training.

[harfman77]

Noesi was on someone scrap when the sox claimed him.

 

I am not trying to argue this, but to point out, the sox pitching depth is

not so deep. the sox still can find gems on the waiver list and the non

tender list.

 

back that up with some fa signing and the sox can pull it off. the biggest

problem I am hoping that the sox not to fall in is being complacent like

last yr. not getting more options.

 

Thats true, but I think Noesi shows a lot of promise and he cost the Sox nothing. Those high reward/low investment type of signings are exactly what the Sox need to keep making, many will fail - Cleto, Paulino - but if you can hit with a couple you have really put the organization in a great position to succeed. The Cubs took a guy two years ago that was a low investment type of guy and half a season later they traded him for a guy that was formerly the Orioles #1 prospect and looks like he has the makings of a solid #2-3 starter. Big free agency acquisitions do not really pan out all that often.

[Rooftop Shots]

Priority 4) Trade Danks

 

Bingo ................I have had about enough of him as well. 15 mil for a guy that has proven its a career year if he wins 10 games?? Bye Bye ASAP

[Leonard Zelig]

Bingo ................I have had about enough of him as well. 15 mil for a guy that has proven its a career year if he wins 10 games?? Bye Bye ASAP

 

Hey, not many people have 4 career years!

[southsider2k5]

Hey let's trade this guy because he sucks! Umm, if he sucks that bad, why would anyone else want him? It isn't like we are some kind of savants here on Soxtalk.

[Whisox05]

I know alot of people on here don't want John Danks to be on the team, but getting rid of him for the sake of not wanting him on the team I don't get. He is mostly likely a former shell of himself and doesn't put up the prettiest numbers. Higher era and has a issue of coughing up the long ball. But you are also talking about the second most durable starting pitcher on the staff for this year. He did tied Quintana with 32 starts most on the team. Also had 193.2 innings pitched this year which is only 6.2 innings short of Quintana's at 200.1. The fact that he made it through the whole year with out going down helps that fact that in the first month of the season the Sox lost Sale, Johnson, and Pualino. Danks and Quintana were the only ones left from the opening day rotation at that time. For most of the year the Sox were trying to fill at least one spot in the rotation. Danks didn't do anything fancy when he pitched but what he did do was eat innings which is most you can ask for from a pitcher especially being the 5th starter. Losing most of your opening day pitching staff in the first 2 months doesn't help. Getting rid of Danks for the sake of not wanting him now opens up 3 holes in the rotations with not alot of back ups just for the 2 spots doesn't make sense. You would have to replace at least 190 innings and 32 starts which on the open market would be coughing up a chunk of change besides the fact you already have 2 open spots in the rotation. Your not likely getting much back for him even if you sending money with him. If you he puts up same amount of innings and starts with a era in the low 4s then I'm fine with that as the 5th starter. Also the thing about him winning 11 starts is him having career year I would take. Quintana only put up 9 wins in each of the last 2 seasons and danks was only one win behind sale this year. People talking about wanting McCarthy as he only put up 10 wins this year and which is the highest hes ever won and hes always injured.

Edited October 20, 2014 by WhiteSoxLifer

[hi8is]

Here's the rationality behind Danks, for me at least.

 

1.) We've already got three lefty starting pitchers penciled in for the future in Sale, Q, and Rodon. Having a fourth lefty rather than two RHSP's isn't ideal in my mind.

 

2.) I've pretty much given up on Danks after holding out hope for his return to form last season.

 

3.) If we ate a good amount of his contract or traded him as a part of a package for another player with a bloated contract... we could indeed get him off our books.

[Vance Law]

Here's the rationality behind Danks, for me at least.

 

3.) If we ate a good amount of his contract or traded him as a part of a package for another player with a bloated contract... we could indeed get him off our books.

 

Andre Ethier for example.

[LDF]

Andre Ethier for example.

or Crawford. I would take either one and I wouldn't care if the dodgers will take

Danks. as long Dodgers add additional players to that package from their farm

system.

 

how bad do the dodgers want Crawford or Ethier off their roster, start

enticing ........

[LDF]

Here's the rationality behind Danks, for me at least.

 

1.) We've already got three lefty starting pitchers penciled in for the future in Sale, Q, and Rodon. Having a fourth lefty rather than two RHSP's isn't ideal in my mind.

 

2.) I've pretty much given up on Danks after holding out hope for his return to form last season.

 

3.) If we ate a good amount of his contract or traded him as a part of a package for another player with a bloated contract... we could indeed get him off our books.

 

if the sox could have traded Danks, I believe they would have done so. he is the sox

to keep.

 

 

oops I forgot, I promise I would not post anything more on Danks.

Edited October 21, 2014 by LDF

[2nd_city_saint787]

But 20 quality starts guys!!! That's only 1 less than Sale and Q!

 

(Not sure if serious)

[Eminor3rd]

I know alot of people on here don't want John Danks to be on the team, but getting rid of him for the sake of not wanting him on the team I don't get. He is mostly likely a former shell of himself and doesn't put up the prettiest numbers. Higher era and has a issue of coughing up the long ball. But you are also talking about the second most durable starting pitcher on the staff for this year. He did tied Quintana with 32 starts most on the team. Also had 193.2 innings pitched this year which is only 6.2 innings short of Quintana's at 200.1. The fact that he made it through the whole year with out going down helps that fact that in the first month of the season the Sox lost Sale, Johnson, and Pualino. Danks and Quintana were the only ones left from the opening day rotation at that time. For most of the year the Sox were trying to fill at least one spot in the rotation. Danks didn't do anything fancy when he pitched but what he did do was eat innings which is most you can ask for from a pitcher especially being the 5th starter. Losing most of your opening day pitching staff in the first 2 months doesn't help. Getting rid of Danks for the sake of not wanting him now opens up 3 holes in the rotations with not alot of back ups just for the 2 spots doesn't make sense. You would have to replace at least 190 innings and 32 starts which on the open market would be coughing up a chunk of change besides the fact you already have 2 open spots in the rotation. Your not likely getting much back for him even if you sending money with him. If you he puts up same amount of innings and starts with a era in the low 4s then I'm fine with that as the 5th starter. Also the thing about him winning 11 starts is him having career year I would take. Quintana only put up 9 wins in each of the last 2 seasons and danks was only one win behind sale this year. People talking about wanting McCarthy as he only put up 10 wins this year and which is the highest hes ever won and hes always injured.

 

Innings are valuable, but replacement-level innings are not. We could get all of those innings out of Scott Carroll + Andre Rienzo for $480k, for example.

 

We have plenty of guys that can be bad for us all year -- Danks is the only one that costs $15m.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Also, since everyone loves when I cherry pick....Throw out his 6 truly dreadful starts and he had a 3.18 ERA for 26 starts (164 innings)....Call those innings luck if you must, but as a 4th/5th starter I'll take a guy who gets shelled once a month if he's also keeping us in games the other 4-5.

 

His contract does change things a bit, so with that said I'm cool with trading him for a decent offer. Don't think we need to just dump him or that trading him should be a priority though.

[hi8is]

But 20 quality starts guys!!! That's only 1 less than Sale and Q!

 

(Not sure if serious)

Hummm... Well then, he was better than I thought and stand corrected.

 

Maybe the game plan is to get him out there building value and trade him at the deadline to make way for Rodon.

That keeps the rotation at three lefties and two right handers as well.

 

Just food for thought.

[BlackSox13]

Also, since everyone loves when I cherry pick....Throw out his 6 truly dreadful starts and he had a 3.18 ERA for 26 starts (164 innings)....Call those innings luck if you must, but as a 4th/5th starter I'll take a guy who gets shelled once a month if he's also keeping us in games the other 4-5.

 

His contract does change things a bit, so with that said I'm cool with trading him for a decent offer. Don't think we need to just dump him or that trading him should be a priority though.

You make some very good points here. Obviously, when Danks was bad he was horrendous but a 3.18 ERA over 26 starts is pretty damn impressive. I knew he was pretty good outside of his bad starts but I did not think he was that good. Fwiw, I don't think you're cherry picking at all.

[Eminor3rd]

Also, since everyone loves when I cherry pick....Throw out his 6 truly dreadful starts and he had a 3.18 ERA for 26 starts (164 innings)....Call those innings luck if you must, but as a 4th/5th starter I'll take a guy who gets shelled once a month if he's also keeping us in games the other 4-5.

 

His contract does change things a bit, so with that said I'm cool with trading him for a decent offer. Don't think we need to just dump him or that trading him should be a priority though.

 

 

You make some very good points here. Obviously, when Danks was bad he was horrendous but a 3.18 ERA over 26 starts is pretty damn impressive. I knew he was pretty good outside of his bad starts but I did not think he was that good. Fwiw, I don't think you're cherry picking at all.

 

But reality doesn't work that way, lol. He did NOT have a 3.18 ERA because he DID have 6 dreadful starts. EVERY pitcher looks good when you remove all their bad performances.

[Dick Allen]

But reality doesn't work that way, lol. He did NOT have a 3.18 ERA because he DID have 6 dreadful starts. EVERY pitcher looks good when you remove all their bad performances.

I would rather he have 20 or more really good starts with the 6 or 7 real clunkers, than have a consistent 5.00 ERA for all of his starts. The fact is, most of the time Danks did not suck, advanced stats be damned.

[LittleHurt05]

But reality doesn't work that way, lol. He did NOT have a 3.18 ERA because he DID have 6 dreadful starts. EVERY pitcher looks good when you remove all their bad performances.

 

Take away Edwin Jackson's worst 8 starts and he has a 4.20 ERA. Why do the Cubs want to dump him so bad?