Keep LaRoche, Trade Danks instead

[professa]

With the Bucs signing Jaso today, the potential trade destinations for Adam LaRoche is dwindling. I know I'm a minority on this but I think LaRoche could be a semi valuable piece for us this year. I think he has a chance to bounce back, especially if we can platoon him. If we sign an outfielder, I think keeping Avi Garcia as LaRoche's platoon partner wouldn't be that bad of an idea. Avi had a .293/.353/.407 slash last year against LHP, and has a career .765 OPS against lefties. If LaRoche can bounce back and give us at the least a 230/335/440 line with 18-20 HRs, that platoon could be semi effective. I think we'd be selling low if we traded Avi this offseason. Let's see if he can put up a .750-.770 OPS in ~200-250 ABs this year and maybe we can get something for him next offseason or even keep him.

 

Now to Danks...

We need more $$ to get an outfield bat, and since LaRoche is most likely staying here, I think our only option is to trade John Danks. Haven't investigated it that much, so perhaps someone else has a better trade scenario, but here's mine: Trade Danks to Milwaukee for Matt Garza and $4M.

Why it makes sense for Milwaukee: The 'Crew are rebuilding, and Garza is making $25M over the next two years. I think they would much rather pay Danks the $15.75 he's owed this year than the $25M that remains on Garza's deal, even if it means they have to kick in some extra $$ to do so.

Why it makes sense for the White Sox: It gives us the money we need this year to sign one of the Big 3 outfielders left on the market. Overall, we would save $3.25M this year plus whatever money MIL kicks in (I'll estimate anywhere from $2-$5M). So that gives us $5-$7M extra to put towards an outfielder.

 

I know Garza was god-awful last year (5.63 ERA, 0.6 fWAR), and taking on 2 years of him is a risk. Here's why I think he'll bounce back to be a decent value: Although he is getting older, his fastball velocity was actually a tick higher than in 2014, when he produced a 3.64 ERA and 2.7 fWAR. He was also a victim of bad luck, as his BABIP was .319. Granted, his BB and HR rates were career worsts, and his K/9 dipped to 6.3, but I think in complete honesty it was just a flukey year. Steamer projects Garza to produce a 1.4 WAR next year and a 4.42 ERA, which is better than Danks' projections. Taking on an extra year of Garza sucks no doubt as he blocks Fulmer, but worst case scenario he can pitch out of the pen in 2017 like Edwin Jackson did this year.

 

Look I think Danks is a good guy in the clubhouse and we know that we're going to get 180 innings out of him, but I think he is the only guy that can be moved on our roster to free up space and not create a hole elsewhere.

Edited December 24, 2015 by professa

[LDF]

With the Bucs signing Jaso today, the potential trade destinations for Adam LaRoche is dwindling. I know I'm a minority on this but I think LaRoche could be a semi valuable piece for us this year. I think he has a chance to bounce back, especially if we can platoon him. If we sign an outfielder, I think keeping Avi Garcia as LaRoche's platoon partner wouldn't be that bad of an idea. Avi had a .293/.353/.407 slash last year against LHP, and has a career .765 OPS against lefties. If LaRoche can bounce back and give us at the least a 230/335/440 line with 18-20 HRs, that platoon could be semi effective. I think we'd be selling low if we traded Avi this offseason. Let's see if he can put up a .750-.770 OPS in ~200-250 ABs this year and maybe we can get something for him next offseason or even keep him.

 

Now to Danks...

We need more $$ to get an outfield bat, and since LaRoche is most likely staying here, I think our only option is to trade John Danks. Haven't investigated it that much, so perhaps someone else has a better trade scenario, but here's mine: Trade Danks to Milwaukee for Matt Garza and $4M.

Why it makes sense for Milwaukee: The 'Crew are rebuilding, and Garza is making $25M over the next two years. I think they would much rather pay Danks the $15.75 he's owed this year than the $25M that remains on Garza's deal, even if it means they have to kick in some extra $$ to do so.

Why it makes sense for the White Sox: It gives us the money we need this year to sign one of the Big 3 outfielders left on the market. Overall, we would save $3.25M this year plus whatever money MIL kicks in (I'll estimate anywhere from $2-$5M). So that gives us $5-$7M extra to put towards an outfielder.

 

I know Garza was god-awful last year (5.63 ERA, 0.6 fWAR), and taking on 2 years of him is a risk. Here's why I think he'll bounce back to be a decent value: Although he is getting older, his fastball velocity was actually a tick higher than in 2014, when he produced a 3.64 ERA and 2.7 fWAR. He was also a victim of bad luck, as his BABIP was .319. Granted, his BB and HR rates were career worsts, and his K/9 dipped to 6.3, but I think in complete honesty it was just a flukey year. Steamer projects Garza to produce a 1.4 WAR next year and a 4.42 ERA, which is better than Danks' projections. Taking on an extra year of Garza sucks no doubt as he blocks Fulmer, but worst case scenario he can pitch out of the pen in 2017 like Edwin Jackson did this year.

 

Look I think Danks is a good guy in the clubhouse and we know that we're going to get 180 innings out of him, but I think he is the only guy that can be moved on our roster to free up space and not create a hole elsewhere.

 

i know you assemble a lot of good hard data and believe in it. but....

 

first for your weakest point. the sox trade danks, who will replace him in the rotation..... carroll, ej, who... now the rotation is down to 3 sp a question mark in ej and ???

 

second, garza, and 4 mil.... for 1 yr of danks .... some how the sox are taking it up the shorts on this... and many questions marks for a potential #5 sp. too much unknown for the risk.

 

no offense.

[BlackSox13]

Garza has good stuff and I just cannot understand how he's become so bad. The problems I see with the Danks for Garza idea are 1) the Sox would be paying him for at least the '16/'17 seasons and possibly '18 and 2) assuming EJ sticks in the rotation, Danks becoming a FA after '16 opens a spot for Fulmer in '17 but if the Sox have Garza they have to try and figure out how to move him to create room for Fulmer. If Garza doesn't improve, he will be difficult to move in a trade, just like Danks has been the last few years.

 

With the way the cost of starting pitching has escalated, Danks is worth pretty close to his '16 salary. One idea could be to trade Danks for perhaps a few low level minor leaguers and try to sign Edwin Jackson on the cheap. I'm not a fan of Jackson by any means but he can be had for relatively cheap which allows the Sox to take the savings and use it towards a FA bat. Jackson seemed to work well with Cooper so it could work, in theory. Not something I would bet the house on, just an idea.

Edited December 24, 2015 by BlackSox13

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Seems like this thread was borrowed from page 3 of this thread http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=97784 which was LaRoche and Danks for Garza. I broke it all down after having some questions which were answered about Garza's contract on page 4 of that thread.

 

Garza's contract is 2-3 years depending on reaching certain goals in order for his contract to vest for the 3rd year . Most likely his contract will be 2 years totaling $25M. Add up Danks and LaRoche contracts for this year and its $28.75M

 

My take was Sox must throw in around $7M (3.5M in 2016 and same in 2017 )for the Brewers to even consider it . Thus the Sox would be taking on $25M and paying the Brewers $7M for a grand total of $32M while they get rid of $28.75M. So the Sox spend an extra $3.25M to free up salary this year . 32 minus 3.5 minus 12.5 equals $16M saved in 2016 while they take on 3.5 +12.5 =$16M in 2017. They would be getting rid of LaRoche freeing up the DH position for Melky and freeing up a roster spot. Makes the salary of someone like Gordon or Cespedes more palatable at least for the 1st year of the contract.

 

Hahns thing is contracts so he could work the numbers however he wanted to in order to minimize the 2nd year where they are paying Garza $12.5M and the Brewers $3.5M. 1 less DH on the roster full of bad defensive players who might convert to DH is a good thing. Paying a little more than half of LaRoche's salary is better then paying for most of it in another trade or eating the whole thing as a sunk cost.

 

Hahn wanted creative. This is it. Try to get Trayce back from the Dodgers and the Sox have their good defensively backup OF who can play all 3 OF positions while Gordon /Upton/Cespedes will play LF or RF or have Trayce start in CF and move Eaton to LF/RF depending on which of the Big 3 the Sox sign. Melky plays once in a while in LF .

Edited December 24, 2015 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Garza has good stuff and I just cannot understand how he's become so bad. The problems I see with the Danks for Garza idea are 1) the Sox would be paying him for at least the '16/'17 seasons and possibly '18 and 2) assuming EJ sticks in the rotation, Danks becoming a FA after '16 opens a spot for Fulmer in '17 but if the Sox have Garza they have to try and figure out how to move him to create room for Fulmer. If Garza doesn't improve, he will be difficult to move in a trade, just like Danks has been the last few years.

 

With the way the cost of starting pitching has escalated, Danks is worth pretty close to his '16 salary. One idea could be to trade Danks for perhaps a few low level minor leaguers and try to sign Edwin Jackson on the cheap. I'm not a fan of Jackson by any means but he can be had for relatively cheap which allows the Sox to take the savings and use it towards a FA bat. Jackson seemed to work well with Cooper so it could work, in theory. Not something I would bet the house on, just an idea.

 

1st you assume Fulmer is ready in '17 . Let's say he is. Garza goes to long relief . That way it's guaranteed he won't reach the goals he needs to to get that 2018 contract . It's doubtful he accomplishes it anyway since he's already behind on the number of starts he would need to make in order for it to vest along with some health goals he could not meet too

 

If they sign one of the Big 3 the budget is shot but not by too much the 1st year from what I proposed. So might as well just sign someone like Jackson because the SP depth sucks anyway. Probably will be plenty of FA's who end up taking 1 year deals.

[LDF]

1st you assume Fulmer is ready in '17 . Let's say he is. Garza goes to long relief . That way it's guaranteed he won't reach the goals he needs to to get that 2018 contract . It's doubtful he accomplishes it anyway since he's already behind on the number of starts he would need to make in order for it to vest along with some health goals he could not meet too

 

If they sign one of the Big 3 the budget is shot but not by too much the 1st year from what I proposed. So might as well just sign someone like Jackson because the SP depth sucks anyway. Probably will be plenty of FA's who end up taking 1 year deals.

 

i can see garza agent filing a grievance with the union and the powers to be.

[Dam8610]

The problem I have with this idea is that Danks actually added value last year, and LaRoche didn't. I think I've seen the theory here before that each additional WAR a player produces is worth about $5 million AAV on a contract. If that's the case, Danks earned $9 million of his contract last year. LaRoche, on the other hand, would need to pay his entire salary plus $7 million back to the team for his performance last year. That's why I think if they can't trade him, they should seriously consider releasing him, and they should not let his contract enter into their decision on pursuing other FA/trade options.

[Bob Sacamano]

So 1 of year of Danks for multiple years of Garza? Pass.

[glangon]

There were points last year where Danks steadied the ship and was pitching well, added to the mix that he owns the Royals, this trade would be daft imo.

 

Personally, I'd see if some Japanese team fancies La Roche.

 

Keep Garza away from our rotation.

 

I think we are in a healthy state. We have a clear 5 man staff with Chris Beck, Carson Fulmer, Spencer Adams and Tyler Danish all in the minors ready to step up if needed.

 

Danks is in the last year of his contract and he'll probably be replaced by one of the above when he goes.

 

Pitching is an area of strength where we have a conveyor belt of talent waiting in the wings.

 

Let's not screw that up and screw over the budget by bringing in Matt Garza

[LDF]

There were points last year where Danks steadied the ship and was pitching well, added to the mix that he owns the Royals, this trade would be daft imo.

 

Personally, I'd see if some Japanese team fancies La Roche.

 

Keep Garza away from our rotation.

 

I think we are in a healthy state. We have a clear 5 man staff with Chris Beck, Carson Fulmer, Spencer Adams and Tyler Danish all in the minors ready to step up if needed.

 

Danks is in the last year of his contract and he'll probably be replaced by one of the above when he goes.

 

Pitching is an area of strength where we have a conveyor belt of talent waiting in the wings.

 

Let's not screw that up and screw over the budget by bringing in Matt Garza

 

nice post.

 

and for me, i still would love the sox to pick up a pitcher. just for the "what if" scenario .

[caulfield12]

The problem I have with this idea is that Danks actually added value last year, and LaRoche didn't. I think I've seen the theory here before that each additional WAR a player produces is worth about $5 million AAV on a contract. If that's the case, Danks earned $9 million of his contract last year. LaRoche, on the other hand, would need to pay his entire salary plus $7 million back to the team for his performance last year. That's why I think if they can't trade him, they should seriously consider releasing him, and they should not let his contract enter into their decision on pursuing other FA/trade options.

 

$7 million now...for one war.

[caulfield12]

There were points last year where Danks steadied the ship and was pitching well, added to the mix that he owns the Royals, this trade would be daft imo.

 

Personally, I'd see if some Japanese team fancies La Roche.

 

Keep Garza away from our rotation.

 

I think we are in a healthy state. We have a clear 5 man staff with Chris Beck, Carson Fulmer, Spencer Adams and Tyler Danish all in the minors ready to step up if needed.

 

Danks is in the last year of his contract and he'll probably be replaced by one of the above when he goes.

 

Pitching is an area of strength where we have a conveyor belt of talent waiting in the wings.

 

Let's not screw that up and screw over the budget by bringing in Matt Garza

 

Adams is at least 1 1/2 years away. Beck and Danish profile just as much as relievers as starters for the moment. This year is make or break for Tyler as a starter. There are even some legit concerns about Fulmer bing able to hold up physically as a starter. It's a stretch to use the term conveyor belt when Jacob Turner is essentially our #6 starter at the moment.

[Dam8610]

$7 million now...for one war.

 

Then I guess Danks was worth $12.6 million and LaRoche should be paying back his entire salary plus $9.8 million.

 

Also, that price is astronomical for 1 WAR.

[BlackSox13]

1st you assume Fulmer is ready in '17 . Let's say he is. Garza goes to long relief . That way it's guaranteed he won't reach the goals he needs to to get that 2018 contract . It's doubtful he accomplishes it anyway since he's already behind on the number of starts he would need to make in order for it to vest along with some health goals he could not meet too

 

If they sign one of the Big 3 the budget is shot but not by too much the 1st year from what I proposed. So might as well just sign someone like Jackson because the SP depth sucks anyway. Probably will be plenty of FA's who end up taking 1 year deals.

To be honest, were both making assumptions. I am assuming Fulmer will be ready for '17 but you're assuming the Brewers would be interested in taking on both contracts in Danks and LaRoche. You're also assuming Garza will be better for the Sox and if he isn't the SOX rotation will be down graded by such a trade which is not good for a team trying to be a contender. Do the Sox really need to spend 13M for a long reliever in Garza if Fulmer is ready in '17?

 

Just my opinion but I would much rather have the contracts of Danks and LaRoche for one more season than Garza's contract for 2-3 more.

 

I still think a better option would be to look into trading Danks for some lower minor league depth and sign Jackson on the cheap. I doubt Jackson would be any worse than Garza. Plus, Jackson can probably be had for a cheap one year deal so the risk is much less than Garza in both the short and long term.

 

 

[professa]

Not saying that I'd rather have Garza over Danks, what I'm saying is if Jerry is not give Hahn any extra money to sogn an outfielder, I think finding a suitor for Danks would be a lot easier than finding one for LaRoche.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

To be honest, were both making assumptions. I am assuming Fulmer will be ready for '17 but you're assuming the Brewers would be interested in taking on both contracts in Danks and LaRoche. You're also assuming Garza will be better for the Sox and if he isn't the SOX rotation will be down graded by such a trade which is not good for a team trying to be a contender. Do the Sox really need to spend 13M for a long reliever in Garza if Fulmer is ready in '17?

 

Just my opinion but I would much rather have the contracts of Danks and LaRoche for one more season than Garza's contract for 2-3 more.

 

I still think a better option would be to look into trading Danks for some lower minor league depth and sign Jackson on the cheap. I doubt Jackson would be any worse than Garza. Plus, Jackson can probably be had for a cheap one year deal so the risk is much less than Garza in both the short and long term.

LOL It's a fantasy trade just like any fantasy trade . It goes without saying that I assume both teams are willing to do it. No sense in proposing it otherwise, I like your ideas I just don't like hanging onto LaRoche.

 

Everybody's in happy talk mood now hoping praying wishing LaRoche has it in him to bounce back.I am one of the most optimistic guys here but guys retire after a season like LaRoche just had at his age. Why on earth would I want his total suckitude again ? A bounce back ? To what .220/ 300. /420 ? Still sucks and his bat isn't getting any faster. Oh yea right he had an injury which never required a stay on the DL . Garbage excuses. Don't need him at DH when we still have Melky, Avi and Abreu and won't need him even more if we sign Gordon.

 

I also never said or even assumed Garza would be better for the Sox . I actually think it's ugly to even think about . Danks is the better pitcher but it's a 5th starter who knows who's going to be better in 2016.

 

The whole reason why I did all that math and proposed the whole thing is because LaRoche is a huge freakin' anchor messing up the 25 man roster , taking up valuable space. He should do us all a favor and retire. I thought the trade would appeal to the Brewers because they make $3.25M in the proposed trade, get an innings eater who might be the better pitcher than Garza , and they only have to wait until after 2016 to be rid of both of them instead of after 2017 to be rid of Garza.

 

On the Sox side they free up one position player roster spot on the 25 which should mean a lot since they seem to be going for it again and it spreads out the money in crap contracts from 1 year to 2 years.

 

I think out of all the posters I read you are the guy who thinks the most like me so I hope I didn't offend you with anything I said. Merry Christmas !

[BlackSox13]

LOL It's a fantasy trade just like any fantasy trade . It goes without saying that I assume both teams are willing to do it. No sense in proposing it otherwise, I like your ideas I just don't like hanging onto LaRoche.

 

Everybody's in happy talk mood now hoping praying wishing LaRoche has it in him to bounce back.I am one of the most optimistic guys here but guys retire after a season like LaRoche just had at his age. Why on earth would I want his total suckitude again ? A bounce back ? To what .220/ 300. /420 ? Still sucks and his bat isn't getting any faster. Oh yea right he had an injury which never required a stay on the DL . Garbage excuses. Don't need him at DH when we still have Melky, Avi and Abreu and won't need him even more if we sign Gordon.

 

I also never said or even assumed Garza would be better for the Sox . I actually think it's ugly to even think about . Danks is the better pitcher but it's a 5th starter who knows who's going to be better in 2016.

 

The whole reason why I did all that math and proposed the whole thing is because LaRoche is a huge freakin' anchor messing up the 25 man roster , taking up valuable space. He should do us all a favor and retire. I thought the trade would appeal to the Brewers because they make $3.25M in the proposed trade, get an innings eater who might be the better pitcher than Garza , and they only have to wait until after 2016 to be rid of both of them instead of after 2017 to be rid of Garza.

 

On the Sox side they free up one position player roster spot on the 25 which should mean a lot since they seem to be going for it again and it spreads out the money in crap contracts from 1 year to 2 years.

 

I think out of all the posters I read you are the guy who thinks the most like me so I hope I didn't offend you with anything I said. Merry Christmas !

I hear ya and its all good here, no offense was ever taken, were just expressing different points of view my man. We're all arm-chair GM's around these parts.

 

Maybe Judge Smails would be interested in using LaRoche on The Flying Wasp. Ahoy Polloi!

 

"Hey, you scratched my anchor! "

 

Edit: almost forgot. Merry Christmas to you CaliSox!

Edited December 25, 2015 by BlackSox13