White Sox Notes: Danks, Williams, Contracts

Here are a few items about John Danks' five-year, $65MM extension with the White Sox, which was officially announced today…

  • Danks has a full no-trade clause for the first year of his contract, reports MLB.com's Scott Merkin.  Danks will have partial no-trade protection for the remaining four years, able to block deals to six teams.
  • The extension "really did come out of nowhere," Danks told media (including CSN Chicago's Chuck Garfien) during a conference call today.  "Obviously, there was a lot of trade talk, and you can’t help but wonder and think…But I think I kind of took the attitude that until something happens I was going to prepare to be with the White Sox. Fortunately, this came along and I couldn’t be happier.”
  • As Garfien notes, this is the first time the White Sox have ever given a pitcher a five-year deal.  Owner Jerry Reinsdorf prefers to keep pitchers on contracts of three years or less due to concerns about health and consistency.
  • From the same conference call, GM Kenny Williams said his comments earlier this month about the White Sox beginning a "rebuilding" phase were misconstrued.  "We are still in win mode,” Williams said. “But at the same time that you’re in win mode, you can be in a little bit of a rebuilding phase, and I tried to articulate that, although I guess that message got lost after I said we were rebuilding. I tried to articulate that it wouldn’t be dominoes falling in terms of a true rebuilding because we have too many good veterans, and veterans looking to bounce back.”

184 Responses to White Sox Notes: Danks, Williams, Contracts Leave a Reply

  1. Eric Foster 4 years ago

    I’m sure as hell no White Sox fan, but the Santos/Molina deal was a huge win for the South Side.
    They have a pretty solid core. Their “competitive rebuilding” won’t take very long.

    • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

      Agree on point 1, not on 2. Molina looks like he will be a very good pitcher, but the Sox have a long way to go. Peavy, Dunn, and Rios all have to get back to form or it will be a long few years.

      • Eric Foster 4 years ago

        I feel like Peavy and Dunn could turn it around…Rios, I’m not so sure of.

        • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

          Peavy is not a problem when he is healthy, it’s BEING HEALTHY that is the problem. Dunn SHOULD be able to turn it around, his track record is too great. Rios…….he worries me a ton.

      • jwsox 4 years ago

        Agree with one exception peavys contract ends after this up coming season

        • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

          Don’t worry, they’ll be supplementing it by giving Danks 14M after Peavy Leaves.

          • jwsox 4 years ago

            It’s not like it’s a horrible deal it’s pretty much market value for a good young left hander

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Really? Wilson got 15M (to Danks 14.25M over his FA years) with much better numbers.

          • rockfordone 4 years ago

            He’s 32 yrs old.???????????????????

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            I know a lot of 26 year old pitchers, none of which anyone would honestly consider giving that kind of money. Danks is one of them.

            If Danks and Wilson were on the same par of pitching levels, you would have an argument. But one is definatively superior.

          • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

            I agree. Right or wrong, Danks got market value .  Most teams looking for pitching would have offered that deal.

      • rockfordone 4 years ago

        Anything will be better last year. They will improve. Can’t go any lower

        • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

          They are without Jackson and Buehrle. Plus they traded their closer. Yeah I think it can get worse.

          • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

            Detroit also will have Fister and Delmon Young for the full year, plus whoever they sign in January.
            I also think it can get worse than the 16 games out last year.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            If you assume none of Danks, Rios, Beckham, Rios, and Dunn bounce back. And I think Chris Sale in the rotation will surpass anything Jackson did for us last season. I think this team will still hover around the .500 mark next year.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            If all of those players bounce back and Sale has a good year, then they will likely do better. I’m a betting man, and I wouldn’t put money on that. I can see Rios, but something is really wrong with Dunn.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            I’m not betting their do better next year either, especially if Kenny ends up trading Quentin and Floyd and Thornton. But even if just Dunn and Danks bounce back, you are talking 5-7 wins right there.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Yeah, and you’re guaranteed to lose 3-5 wins from other players being missing or having injuries, or off years. That logic never works out.

            Jays fans are the worst for that. They think they’ll get a few more wins because Litsch will be healthy and Overbay/Wells will bounce back, and then niether happens, more players get injured and the team loses more games.

            Dunn returning to form would be huge though. Its a big wild card.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            I’m talking about it being a wash between some players bouncing back, and some players being traded. This is not an old team where the core of the group should expect decline. This is a young team that should only see improvement, outside of Konerko and AJ. This team is likely destined for 72-78 wins next year. If ALL the players bounce back, and we DON’T dump our veterans in a rebuilding effort, this team could win around 90+ games, but the chances are pretty damn slim.

    • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

      The White Sox have to slash payroll, they have Rios, Dunn, Peavy contracts for close to 100 million dollars, the farm system is the worst in baseball, attendance is dropping every year, and the GM has no idea of what to do next. 
      The “competitive rebuilding” may take a while.

      • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

        Rios, Dunn, and Peavy won’t even combine for HALF of the $100M you claim. They will make $43M next year combined. Yes, the farm system is awful, yes attendance is and will be a problem (although I am pretty sure they have always remained in the top half of baseball), and to say the GM has no idea what to do next is not fair at all. This team could easily be competitive by 2014. Don’t forget the AL Central is no powerhouse division. 

        • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

          100 mill for the entire contracts. I should have worded it differently.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            $103M, yes, but that’s spread out over 7 years (plus 2 buyout years). So that’s an average of 14.7M a year. Terrible, sure, but at least they are spread out some.

          • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

            3 calendar years. Rios has 3 years left, Dunn has 3 more years and Peavy has 1 with a 4 million dollar payout.
            By the 2015 season, the Sox will be rid of those contracts.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            I mean like 7 seasons worth of play. You know what I’m getting at? Like in 2012, we will get 3 seasons from them because we are getting 3 separate values. Either way, we agree that these guys are money sucks. (Well, Rios is for sure. Peavy is good when healthy, and I think Dunn will bounce back for sure)

          • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

            3 calendar years. Rios has 3 years left, Dunn has 3 more years and Peavy has 1 with a 4 million dollar payout.
            By the 2015 season, the Sox will be rid of those contracts.

  2. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Wow. So you only sign pitchers for 3 years, but Danks is the exception? Shoulda stuck to the rule. Can’t see White Sox fans looking back at this contract as a good deal.

    • sox2727 4 years ago

      right because the deal is a gross overpay for a bad 26 year old pitcher…

      • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

        Not a bad pitcher. Take out the first year, and its a 14.25 average salary. Thats about what Roy Halladay made at the same age.

        • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

          Why would you eliminate the year in which he makes $8M? Because it hurts your argument? His AAV on this contract is $13M. His worst full season in the bigs was 2009, when he put up a 2.9 WAR and was worth $13.1M. Assuming he remains healthy, he is a LOCK to outperform his contract.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            The year he makes 8M is his arbitration year, it does not reflect his free agent value.

            Again this WAR to contract value scale is warped. By that logic Halladay and Lincecum should make 50 million each.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            Yes, they should. But they won’t because there is an “invisible ceiling”, if you will, for player contracts. One day we MAY get to the point where players make $50M a year. But until we do, no MVP-type player will ever get paid what he is technically worth (assuming he dominate each year). 

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Ahhh, now this is my favorite argument of all. Danks deserves 14M, and Halladay deserves more than the entire Rays Payroll. Maybe its time to stop and think about whether this pay scale of yours is completely accurate.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            This is Fangraphs bro, not some crazy numbers we are all making up . Take the time to check out that website, you might learn a thing or to.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            I think you need to take the time and actually look at fangraphs honestly. Is this really giving out accurate information?

            If it is saying halladay should make 50M (more than the rays entire team) do you really think this is a working system?

            No. Because for some reason fangraphs has created an entire wave of people like you who think they are perfect and snort at anyone who questions their bizarre formulas and questionable methodology.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            See, you seem to be operating by taking the best players in baseball, looking at their salary, and saying “Well, that must be what they are worth”, and then working backwards from there. Whereas Fangraphs does the opposite and takings a replacement level player’s worth and works up. The people who make their formula’s are much smarter than you or I.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Take a second to look at the formula’s. Trust me, high school programmers could have come up with that stuff.

            Market value is determined by…the MARKET. Using that as a basis for value is only the foundation of economics. Fangraphs works backwards.

            And surely someone at fangraphs who are “smarter than you and I” could see the obvious flaw in a model that analyses replacement players values, and extrapolates upwards (linearly). Where else in society is that ever done? Do we extrapolate the value of large houses based on the increased square footage of small houses? Do we extrapolate the value of powerful cars based on the price and horsepower of cheap cars? If its nonsense in the real world, why does it make sense in baseball?

            This is why it only works for fans. Because MLB clubs have stats guru’s who can asily infer that this nonsense is useless.  

    • Phillies_Aces35 4 years ago

      He’s not great but he’s a very solid pitcher worth locking up with some good years ahead of him. He’s not the guy you DON’T make the exception for. If anything, he’s a guy you want post rebuilding.

    • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

      Actually, Buehrle was the exception when he signed a 4 year deal in 2007.

      • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

        Buehrle is the kind of guy who would be the exception. Not Danks.

        • sox2727 4 years ago

          Since the start of the 2008 season Mark Buehrle FIP: 3.94, 4.46, 3.90, 3.98.  John Danks FIP: 3.44, 4.59, 3.70, 3.82.  Mark Buehrle also never posted a FIP below 4.00 in his first 4 years as a starter

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            FIP is a useless stat, it drives me nuts to see people use it. Its only based on walks, SO, and HR.

          • lolpods 4 years ago

            but ERA is like, so awesome.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            ERA is the definition stat. A pitchers job is to allow as few runs as possible. Of course it has problems (notably, small sample sizes, ranges of opponents, infield players, ballpark, etc), but it is still usefull (though it requires careful use).

            FIP on the other hand uses SO, BB, and HR, while completely bypassing the most important aspect to scoring runs (hits). There are tons of high strikeout players who have great FIP’s, but bleed runs. Brandon Morrow is a great example.

          • shysox 4 years ago

            For Christ’s sake, seriously? Every comment you have made on this post has been completely invalid and you’ve just made another one. Stop it.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            No, its just you guys. Ever notice that the commentators and GM’s, and coaches in interviews hardly ever come out and talk about WAR or FIP?

            Its just crazy stats the fans made up because baseball fans love stats. FIP is the worst of them all.

            FIP = (13HR + 3BB – 2SO)/IP + 3

            Thats how they calculate it. Does it have any logical reason? Nope. Just something only the people drinking the fan graphs cool-aid will enjoy.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            It’s because those are the 3 100% pitcher independent stats. The idea is that you do no involve the defense at all. You could have an incredible defense, or you could have a little little team behind you, and your FIP will be the same (minus HR that are robbed, I suppose)

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            I know thats the idea, I’m saying its wrong. You can’t truly analyse a pitcher while missing how many runs he lets in and how many hits he gives up.

            You “could” have an increadible defense, or a really bad one. But 95% of defences make 95% of the same plays. Its a very small factor.  

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            I’m not saying I have ever used FIP to compare pitchers, I am explaining to you it’s value.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Wasn’t it you who showed me Danks and Buerhle’s FIP numbers over the last 4 years (I apologise if it was not)?

            If you don’t use FIP to compare pitchers then we are in agreement.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            No, it wasn’t me.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Sorry, never mind. I apologise.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            can you draw him a picture so he can conceptualize it?

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            You guys don’t listen. I could argue that goalies in hockey should be defined by a stat that only uses PIM’s, and passes because those are the only ones completely in the goalies control. Thats true, but its missing a heck of a lot of information that is very useful (even if its not 100% in the goalies control).

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            How the hell are penalty minutes and passes related to goalies at all? You make less and less sense every time you comment.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            THEY AREN’T. Just like how strikeouts and Walks don’t mean as much to a pitcher as HITS and ACTUAL RUNS.

            You don’t get it. You are judging a pitcher using 3 stats that dont adequately define a pitchers performance!

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            FIP is a useless stat, it drives me nuts to see people use it. Its only based on walks, SO, and HR.

      • And Danks is just like Buehrle in every way.

  3. With all these prosepcts getting traded all over the place, looking at Molina’s numbers makes me wonder.  Did the Sox get robbed, or did we rob the Jays.  Santos wasn’t really the same pitcher the last month, but this was his first as a closer & really first as a full time pitcher.  The year before he was kind of a developing mop up guy.  If you compare the Santos trade to the Andrew Bailey trade, I’d rather have Molina than what the A’s got.  That’s just me.

  4. Heeector 4 years ago

    Rios i going to be a mvp candidate next year 30 30 300. Avg and 100 rbis

    • jwsox 4 years ago

      Going by his career mark of bad year- good year- bad year it’s a possibility. As a sox fan all I want is good defense and average. .260 average. .320 obp. 15-20 hrs and 20-25 steals.

      • sox2727 4 years ago

        @jwsox – I like the optimism, but if you look at Rios’ numbers and take away the huge May in 2010, his numbers with the Sox have been AWFUL.  I have no hope for him.

        • coldgoldenfalstaff 4 years ago

          I have hope for Rios. It’s obvious Greg Walker rubbed him the wrong way,
          and also a lot of other Sox hitters other than Paul Konerko.

          Manto, the Sox new hitting coach has already talked to the struggling
          players and is actually listening to them, unlike the previous staff.

          link to espn.go.com

          I think Rios’ problems are all mental/ego based. If he can feel good
          about where he is and how the Sox are working with him, he could bounce
          back and have a 2010 like season.

          As for Dunn, we’ll have to see. There needs to be a 180 in getting in shape and working hard for him to turn things around.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            I’m ready to fire Manto already.  I don’t know if you heard his interview after being hired where he said he doesn’t believe in OBP.

          • coldgoldenfalstaff 4 years ago

            That to me seems like a departure from the Ozzie style of baseball, i.e. get a guy on, bunt/steal and settle for one run.

            I’d be glad if they move away from that and focus on scoring runs and good hitting in any situation and not such a focus in getting men on base (OBP) who may not score.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            the thing is though the more baserunners you have the more potential runs you can score.  not having ozzie give away outs by bunting stupidly will help

        • coldgoldenfalstaff 4 years ago

          I have hope for Rios. It’s obvious Greg Walker rubbed him the wrong way,
          and also a lot of other Sox hitters other than Paul Konerko.

          Manto, the Sox new hitting coach has already talked to the struggling
          players and is actually listening to them, unlike the previous staff.

          link to espn.go.com

          I think Rios’ problems are all mental/ego based. If he can feel good
          about where he is and how the Sox are working with him, he could bounce
          back and have a 2010 like season.

          As for Dunn, we’ll have to see. There needs to be a 180 in getting in shape and working hard for him to turn things around.

    • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

      Peavy is going to go 29-3 with a 0.48 ERA as well.

    • cachhubguy 4 years ago

      He would have to go 24 – 5 with a 2.40 ERA  to compete with last years MVP.

  5. Red_Line_9 4 years ago

    People need to look at HOW stats are accumulated, not just the end of year tally.  What I saw from Danks last year was a pitcher who got almost no run support early.  Was stellar during the summer…..had a couple of really nasty outings and had a slight injury to deal with.  I would say that last season, given his track record, was a wash.

    • DING DING DING! Some fans actually aren’t so clueless. In 3 years in which Danks got 13 or more wins he has managed to do so while managing to hold runners under 5 earned runs and the games in which he lost were all due to lack of consistent hitting. Some pitchers would get all the offense and then our team would come out like duds the next game. Throw last years stats out the window for the White Sox because a lot of players had years under their avg. What’s that tell us? Well, what happened at the end of the year? Didn’t Ozzy get fired. Why did Kenny stay? Because the players that he has around him are still quality players and he is one of the more aggressive GMs that knows how to use the minor league system to get value back and then how to replenish with prospects when the time is right. He did get a a WS in 05.

      • sox2727 4 years ago

        My problem with Kenny stems from the moves that have been made since July 2009.  Acquiring an already injured Jake Peavy and his huge contract, claiming Rios and his huge contract off waivers, and trading for E-Jack, when the guy he traded was very similar and cost controlled at 1/20 the price.  Prior to 2009 I had no issue with KW, but he has not been doing his job effectively since and I don’t think he should get a pass.

        • And what happens if the Sox go on to make it into the playoffs this year with PV holding his own? Or even just having a winning record would that go on to make you happy. PV can bounce back at anytime now (2nd year after that ligament surgery and he should finally be getting most of his motion back + is he a hard worker that will hit his spots). We got the sideshow freak out of town in Ozzy so our players should actually start playing again now that they don’t have to listen to Ozzy and his BS excuses. He wanted out of Chicago why do you think they didn’t wait until the year was over. They wanted to get rid of him that much.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            I think Jake Peavy should pitch like the ace he is paid to be.  I would love to think he will bounce back, but I just don’t believe we will see the Jake Peavy that was in San Diego due to the age/injuries that have occured.

          • They don’t need him to be the same pitcher as he was. All they need is for him to be consistent and for the rest of the team to play on pace with their overall annual career #s.

          • Red_Line_9 4 years ago

            I’m not sure we’d have seen the pitcher Peavy was in San Diego regardless of the injury.  That’s a heck of an adjustment…AL to NL and Petco to Comiskey..yes..Comiskey.

        • Red_Line_9 4 years ago

          I’m still unclear why they didn’t just deal straight with the Cardinals for Colby Rasmus.

        • Red_Line_9 4 years ago

          The Sox have outlandish ticket prices and seating policies.  I wonder if they’ve hidden behind these contracts as an excuse to justify them.  There’s no reason they shouldn’t have a higher attendance.  But it’s not as if they are truly a large market team.  They in no split the region 50/50 with the Cubs.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            the sox attendance problems have numerous factors the overall ticket prices are one of them in the last few seasons

          • Red_Line_9 4 years ago

            To be fair, the White Sox do offer a pair of completely free tickets for each kid in their Kids Club.  There are also many coupon codes…Monday 1/2 price etc.  It just seems ridiculous to have the Dodgers in town for interleague and have 15,000 in the park.  They’d be better to give the tickets out than have the seats empty.  Empty seats don’t buy $7 hot dogs.

      • Red_Line_9 4 years ago

        I think the Sox are still counting on too many rebounds, which aren’t impossible, of course.  But that team last year was right at .500 and stunk the joint up for quite awhile.  There will likely be rebounds and some natural regressions.  I’d still like to see them add a starter and leadoff hitter. All in all, they look good enough to compete in a division that isn’t the strongest.  They just can’t have another early season doom like they had last year.  It’s actually amazing that they ever sniffed .500 after that.  It’ll be interesting to see if Robin Ventura can manage a pitching staff any better than Ozzie did.

        The White Sox might never rebuild in the sense that a small market team would, but they certainly need to build a stronger minor league system to patch holes with and use as trading chips.

  6. FunkyTime 4 years ago

    I can hear Kenny Williams back peddling about his rebuilding comment from here.

  7. cachhubguy 4 years ago

    It wasn’t misconstrued. It wasn’t taken out of context. He said he was rebuilding. When he found he couldn’t get enough for Danks, he changed his mind. He doesn’t want to say that. OK. We get it.

  8. lefty58 4 years ago

    Honest to God, I hate everything about Kenny Williams and that is really tough on a lifelong Sox fan.

    • sox2727 4 years ago

      I find it perfectly defensible to despise someone who keeps getting rewarded for under-performing at their job, and acts as if he isn’t

    • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

      I can respect that point of view a thousand times more than Sox fans who give him a lifetime pass because of 05.
      I think both Chicago baseball teams have had the 2 worst GM’s in all of baseball, over the past 5 years.
      At least the Cubs have come to terms with that reality, and begun the massive teardown and rebuild.
      I think most Sox fans would like to see the same thing on the south side.

      • mboss 4 years ago

        Agreed, for the first time in a long time I’m jealous of the cubs front office and approach. I know they are going to build the right way. Although it may be harder/longer now with the new CBA.

        I would have liked to see Williams gone when Ozzie left and given the job to Rick Hahn. Williams got a 3-4 year pass after the World series but it’s time to perform now. After horrible trades for Swisher and trading Swisher away as well as Dan Hudson for Jackson et al….Williams is just too impulsive sometimes for the teams good.

        • sox2727 4 years ago

          I couldn’t agree more.  It’s so disturbing that they have no clear plan.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            Just because you don’t know their plan doesn’t mean they don’t have one. 

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            How can you rationalize the things that have been done in the last month and say that there’s a clear plan?

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            How can I rationalize the TWO, count them, TWO moves we have made this offseason? Well let’s see….you trade a RELIEVER (Whom you already have a cheaper, younger replacement for) for a young starter who, according to some scouts, could be a future #2 pitcher. Then you resign your 26-year-old ace (to this team). 

            THAT is how those moves are rationalized. Both would be moves done for a rebuilding team, and both are moves done for a team that is contending. WE, the fans, really have no idea what direction we are going right now, because neither move is telling, but that doesn’t mean Kenny doesn’t have that plan laid out.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            the fact that we don’t know was my point

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            Right, WE do not, but I think it’s unfair to say that Kenny is sitting in his office with no plan of direction. Don’t forget he OFTEN uses the media as a mouthpiece to keep his dealings under the radar. He always makes moves no one saw coming because he tells the media one thing, and does another. 

      • Yeah, must be hard to reason since your team will not win a WS until another 103 years. Kenny is a good GM. Things happen in baseball and can’t always go the way they want it just like it doesn’t always go the way we think it should for players that we expect to be good. That’s why they play the games.

        • disgustedcubfan 4 years ago

          Kenny is a good GM? I understand blind loyalty, but c’mon.
          You think the current state of White Sox baseball is “good”?
          What would you consider a bad GM?  Bad trades, horrible free agent signings, dysfunctional clubhouse, terrible waiver claims, bankrupt farm system, disinterested dwindling fan base?
          If you like those things, yes, Kenny is good.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            His big trades tend to be bad, his smaller trades are usually gold. What horrible free agent signings? Unless you honestly think 2011 is an accurate representation of who Adam Dunn really is; which would be highly foolish of you. Dysfunctional clubhouse? Lol, based on who? Joe Cowley? Haha. Terrible farm system, yes. Disinterested dwindling fan base? That’s a reflection of poor team play, not Kenny Williams specifically. 

            Kenny is fine GM. We haven’t seen this team be great in a while, but we have also never seen this team be terrible. At the very least, they are always a contender at some point in the season.

          • Your a cubs fan! What do you know? You think minor league players are gold.

    • lolpods 4 years ago

      yeah, i wish we would have never won a world series so this guy would have been fired by now. life sucks.

  9. sox2727 4 years ago

    Hey at least someone out there has the same brain function as Mitch Williams…I mean it’s a good thing the Jays GM doesn’t believe in modern advanced stats…OH WAIT…

  10. sox2727 4 years ago

    damn computer…

  11. sox2727 4 years ago


    • blueandwhite89 4 years ago


      • sox2727 4 years ago

        feel free to mix in a clue at some point…

        • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

          Well you said it was your “damn computer” but I think this is more of a PEBKAC problem.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            wow did you come up with that all on your own?  at what point are you going to realize that your own team’s GM realizes heavily on sabermetrics?  i mean have you have ever heard AA talk before?

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            AA doesn’t go around talking about sabermetrics every chance he gets, as a matter of fact his interviews (like any other GM) tend to focus on the “real” stats (HR, ERA, etc).

            However I do know he uses sabermetrics as a reference (Tom Tango is a Jays consultant). I agree with this. It should be something you look at. But to say he relies on it (or “realizes” as you put it) is far fetched.

            And even if he did it wouldn’t change my oppinion. It’s not like I am bound to agree with him just because I am a jays fan. Honestly, that is the worst argument ever used in pro sports (the “you’re wrong because the team you cheer for does X” argument).

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            That’s because most of those people in the front office realize the general public is dumb and advanced statistics mean nothing to them because they don’t understand them. Do you really think scientists walk around and talk over people’s heads just because they know more? No, they talk down to be able to communicate with people. Not everyone is like Sheldon Cooper from Big Bang Theory when it comes to talking to people. 

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            lol, this isn’t rocket science. The models are increadibly simple. The writers here use the terms UZN, WAR, FIP constantly. The argument that AA “relies” on these stats, yet doesn’t mention them out of fan ignorance is absurd.

            Coaches and GM’s use the terms they use on the field, and the media and fans pick it up. Its how it works in every sport.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            It’s like talking to a spoon….

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Or an egg…

            In all seriousness you are spent and you know it. You’ve gone into conspiracy theory land to defend FIP. Enough is enough. GM’s and coaches do not use it as much as the real stats. Its a fan made, fan loving stat. But no real connection to baseball.

          • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

            Lol, and again you continue to believe I somehow have been advocating for FIP. And AGAIN I will state that I have never used the stat to compare pitchers. When you saw me talk about FIP was merely explaining to you how the stat works, and why it is valued by some.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Ok, but you use the WAR stat dont you? That one is derived heavily from FIP for pitchers.

            In fact I know it was you who said WAR was better than ERA.

            It is worthwhile to do some research and see how these formulas are calculated. You would be shocked at their simlicity and their non existant connection to reality.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            Ya front offices don’t use it, that’s why Bill James is a consultant for the Red Sox…

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            Strawman again. I never said they don’t use it, I said they don’t RELY on it. Baseball teams have consultants on everything. In fact, I bet the Red Sox have over a dozen stats gurus. Congrats, one of them does sabermetrics.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            what is this “UZN” you speak of?  See I can be a grammar tool also…

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            That would be spelling, and good job dodging the content of the post (you know, the part where I show you’re completely wrong).

  12. sox2727 4 years ago

    Let’s try this one: A pitcher produces a league average GB%/FB%/HR% and pitches in a pitcher/hitter neutral park. 

    In scenario A, his defense is: 1B -A. Gonzalez, 2B- Utley, SS – Tulo, 3B – Beltre, LF – Crawford, CF – Ellsbury, RF – Upton

    In Scenario B, his defense is: 1B – Konerko, 2B – Guillen, SS – Betancourt, 3B – Ramirez, LF – Soriano, CF – Rowand, RF – Quentin. 

    His ERA (since it’s the best stat and truly measures how good pitchers are) should be the same in both scenarios right?

    • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

      If this is an argument for me to read then its a strawman. I never said fielding has no impact on ERA, nor did I ever say that ERA is the best stat.It is the defining stat of a pitchers role. Is has bias like any other, and is in no means perfect. Fielding is one of them. But that is MUCH better than what FIP does (which is leave out useful information).

      I would rather have numbers with a slight (but well understood and defined) bias, than ones that don’t use a lot of valuable information.

      • sox2727 4 years ago

        and you would also choose to not answer a clearly defined question

        • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

          I answered it indirectly, saying fielding is a bias on the ERA stat. Nice to know you read what I said before replying. However since you seem to work better with simple answers, i will give you an easier answer below:

          Yes, the same pitcher will have a slightly higher ERA with a lesser fielding team behind him.

          • sox2727 4 years ago

            I actually read it perfectly, however, I prefer that when I ask a SIMPLE, DIRECT question that it be answered.  I didn’t really think it was that difficult but I guess for some people it is.

          • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

            oh, so you were just being a tool. gotcha

            Nice job dodging the content again btw. Really makes you look sharp.

  13. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Honestly, for me, I feel like I’m talking to people who don’t watch the games.

    You act as though the pitcher has no control over hits, yet in Baseball managers make pitching decision based on their batting average splits (a stat derived from hits). And these splits vary HUGE from 0.200 for a good lefty vs lefty’s, to 0.350 for a troubled righty pitcher facing a lefty hitter. This is the stuff that really matters. Comparing pitchers on walks, SO, and HR alone is like missing a whole part of the game.

    And the worst part is, the FIP is a huge contributer to the WAR stat. So at the end of the day, both are based on feeble information. So then you take this feeble stat and tell me that Danks is a great pitcher, even though he gave up more than the average number of runs/9 innings, and allowed more hits than innings pitched. Guys hit 0.273 off of him, and only 0.232 off of Wilson. Thats a huge difference, completely ignored by FIP (and by extension, WAR).

    • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

      I love how you are still operating under the assumption that everyone thinks Danks had a better 2011 than CJ Wilson, not that Danks should and will easily earn his $13M AAV contract.

      • blueandwhite89 4 years ago

        Well, whether his calibre of pitcher is worth the 13M is another topic all together. This is about FIP and WAR.

        The real stats (ERA, average, WHIP) show Danks to be outside the top starters (#2 type IMO). The dollar value that is worth is another question entirely.

        • Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

          Danks IS a #2 starter. You seem to be arguing against points no one is making. Danks is NOT an elite pitcher, he is not ONE OF THE BEST, he is NOT AN ACE. He is simply a very solid #2 starter.

  14. sox2727 4 years ago

    thankfully someone else gets it

  15. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Coming off a year where he had an ERA over 4, you hand him 14 million dollars for 4 years (not counting the 8 mil 1st year for his arb). 

    The Jays did a similiar thing for Halladay, buying his first four years of free agency (age 26ish) at about 13 mil per year. Just to compare. Halladay’s WAR is a lot higher than Danks.

    History suggests he’ll stay healthy and consistent. But averaging a 4.03 ERA over his career, does he justify 14M?

  16. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I’m not a cubs fan. I’m a Jays fan.

    I think if you’re paying a guy 14M per season (which only about a dozen SP’s in baseball make), you should be a top 30 pitcher in baseball. Danks is not.  

  17. cachhubguy 4 years ago

    Are you really trying to justify his contract by comparing it to a bad contract?

  18. Casor_Greener 4 years ago

    yeah I’m sure Kershaw will sell out his first 4 years of free agency for 14.5 million.  stop comparing steals that happened in the past (Halladay) as if that’s something that occurs all the time.

  19. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    You are using ERA as the end-all-be-all in your argument. That’s your problem. Look at WAR, not ERA.

  20. sox2727 4 years ago

    i see you graduated from the mitch williams school of pitcher evaluation. 

  21. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Wilson just got 15.5M, only 1M more than Danks.

    You look at the guys who make 13-17M, Weaver, Verlander, King Felix, Wilson, Carpenter…they are all solid #1 guys. Danks is a #2/3 guy.

  22. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I find it amusing that you accuse me of being intoxicated, and then proceed to roll off completely false facts.

    This is CJ’s 3rd year as a starter. Considering that he got a 3.35 and a 2.94 ERA in each year, and had 200+ innings with a WHIP around 1.2 each year, I would say that is a very good sign he can start in the bigs.

    Danks has been an MLB starter for 5 years (and really only “solid” for 4 of them). His WHIP has consistently been above 1.2, and an average ERA of 4.03.

    Wilson is far and away the superior pitcher, even at the age of 31.

  23. YanksFanSince78 4 years ago

    burnt! he had a good rant though.

  24. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    Since Danks came in to the league in 2007, he has had the 22nd most WAR of all the pitchers in baseball. He is 26 and going to be entering his prime in a couple seasons. He IS going to out perform this contract, and probably rather easily.

  25. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    Wilson is 31. Danks is 26. I’d bet money on Danks having a better contract in which he is 31 by the end of it, whereas Wilson will be 36. 

  26. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    No one is disputing who had the better 2011, but CJ Wilson WILL NOT have better seasons in ages 31-36 than Danks will in ages 26-31. Wilson is due for decline, while Danks is due for improvement.

  27. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    WAR is sporatic. A pitchers job is to stop runs, which ERA displays.

    But even if you use WAR, was Danks a top 30 pitcher last season? Top 60?

  28. Look at his overall logs per game. ER’s in which he had 3-5 runs scored against and compare to runs per game that our offense got him. That actually explains a lot of why his ERA climbed like it did. Danks is around a 3.40 era pitcher overall and could easily get us 13 plus wins every year.

  29. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I’d take that bet any day. Forget age, one guy can be really dominant and has clearly superrior stuff.

  30. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    It will take a heckova lot of decline from Wilson, and a heckova lot of improvement from Danks to make them equal.

  31. cachhubguy 4 years ago

    Oh, we did not know that. Since he is going to out perform the contract over the next 5 years, it’s great.

  32. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    He has to be better than he has been to do that. Awefully big prediction.

  33. sox2727 4 years ago

    He already has been better than the value of the contract.  For the value of the contract to be a push he has to average 2.5 WAR per year.  In his worst season of his career, he produced 2.9 WAR.

  34. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    As Sox2727 pointed out, no, he doesn’t. He can repeat his 2011 down year, and still outproduce that contract. His down year last year was valued at $14.2M, more than his AAV over this new extension.

  35. sox2727 4 years ago

    ERA displays a teams ability to prevent runs.  Which team had a better overall team defense last year the Rangers or White Sox?  Thus a team with better defense is going to prevent more runs.  If you want to look at true pitcher performance look at FIP.

  36. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    WAR is FARRRR superior to ERA, it just is. 

    And Danks was 45th last year. But he is not being rewarded for his 2011 season, he is being paid what he has accomplished and is likely to achieve in the future. 2011 was the exception, not the rule.

  37. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    Not entirely true, all they have to do is revert back to before 2011, and Danks should outperform him quite easily. Otherwise, it will be a pretty interesting race. See you in 5 years.

  38. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I love that argument. It just is.

    WAR is sporatic at best. I think RA Dickey had a higher WAR than Lincecum even though he had a far lower ERA (and is undoubtably the better pitcher).

    You can’t definetively say 2011 was the exception. And maybe you should wait a year to figure that out before handing the guy 65M?

  39. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    FIP is a joke, its a mathematical calculation based on SO, BB, and HR. How you can evaluate a hitter without looking at how many hits he gives up is mind boggling.

    I agree, some defenses are better. The Rangers infield is very good, but do you really think its the difference between a 2.94 ERA and a 4.33 ERA? I think it has more to do with the pitcher.

  40. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    really? 14.25M is the going rate for a pitcher who gives up an above average number of earned runs, and more hits than innings pitched? huh?

  41. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    2.5 WAR is worth 14M?? by that logic Verlander and Halladay should be paid 50M per year.

  42. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    2.5 WAR is worth 14M?? by that logic Verlander and Halladay should be paid 50M per year.

  43. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Great logic. If you throw out one players best year and another players worst year they are kind of comparable right? Even though in 2010, Wilson still struck out more, and had a lower ERA…but whatever… 

  44. sox2727 4 years ago

    Do you realize how much Verlander and Halladay make?  I suggest you get some facts and look at the numbers

  45. sox2727 4 years ago

    You clearly choose to evaluate players using an antiquated 20th century thought process so enjoy…

  46. sox2727 4 years ago

    Do you not understand the fact that SO, BB, and HR are the 3 things a pitcher DIRECTLY controls?  It’s not that hard to understand…I guess for some it is though.

  47. sox2727 4 years ago

    Dickey had a higher WAR than Lincecum?  In Canada, is 2.5 > 4.4?  Facts are really troubling some people…

  48. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    link to baseball-reference.com

    This is the other awesome thing about WAR. Everybody calculated it differently. I assume you use the fangraphs version?

  49. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I used the baseball reference version. Dickey is 4.9, Lincecum 4.4

  50. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Just because its the only thing the pitcher directly controls does not mean its a good tool for analysing the pitcher. You guys are so drunk on stats you miss the whole “baseball” aspect of it.

    Studies were actually done showing the FIP logic is bogus (and that the quality of pitching is a huge factor in determining how many hits are given up).

    There is a system to take fielding out of pitchers stats in ERA. Its called errors. Past that the ability of the infield is not nearly as vital as the pitcher (as 95% of 2B can make/not make 95% of the same plays).

  51. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Just because your stats are newer does not make them supperior. FIP, UZR, and WAR are all sporadic (at best) and completely biased and innacurate at worst.

    Do GM’s go out and say they signed a guy because of his good FIP? Nope, they say he’s an inning eater, or he doesn’t give up a lot of hits, or he has a low ERA. Its not the “old” way, its the better way.

  52. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Halladay 20M, Verlander 20M (starting in 2012).

    I’m saying that if Danks is worth 14M for a 2.9 WAR, then Halladay and Verlander *should* make 50M per year (by that logic). You should really read before posting.

  53. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    I didn’t know anyone in this world used WAR from any site BUT Fangraphs. If I remember correctly, Fangraphs (or writers there) developed the WAR stat. It’s the only place people I’ve ever seen reference the number.

  54. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    Lol, you REALLY think ERA has no barring on good/bad fielding? You got to be kidding me….

  55. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    Do you truly believe that scouts and the people who look in to players before they are signed or traded for look at ERA and choose to ignore sabermetrics? Noooo. You are acting like the old men who worked for the A’s in the movie Moneyball. 

  56. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago


  57. sox2727 4 years ago

    and you should really learn a thing or to about modern day player evaluation before posting

  58. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago


  59. blueandwhite89 4 years ago


    Baseball reference has their own method, as does baseball prospectus.

    Fangraphs probably likes to hear you say that though.

  60. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    I never said that. I believe they call this the strawman fallacy? Where you set up as though I made an argument I never did?

    Fielding plays a role. Is it as big as pitching? Nope.

  61. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Oh I’m sure its used.  But with a very large grain of salt. And I bet if you asked 30 GM’s whether ERA or FIP is more impoortant, 30 will tell you ERA.

  62. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Actually I’ve studied it quite significantly. I think the issues with FIP and UZN and WAR are that fans don’t understand enough about how they are calculated. If you really knew, you’d see this for what it is. A crazy idea by a couple of guys.

  63. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    If you want to use that logic then Danks in regressing and Wilson is getting better (looking at 2010/2011). But most people would say its just yearly fluctuations and average them…

    If anything Wilsons might be an example of significant progression as it was only his 2nd year as a starter.

  64. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    I know BR does, I am saying I have never seen someone use their version of WAR before, it’s always been used as a reference to Fangraph’s calculations.

  65. Joey Doughnuts 4 years ago

    There is a system to take fielding out of pitchers stats in ERA. Its called errors.”

    That was your quote. You claimedERA was a stat in which defensemakes no difference…..

  66. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    Well other numbers are used quite frequently, and in fact they dispute it constantly. Fangraphs is just the preference of the MLBTR bubble.

  67. blueandwhite89 4 years ago

    No, you’re putting words in my mouth.

    I didn’t say errors was the perfect system, but it is a system that works fairly well. Like I said 95% of infields make 95% of the same plays. You don’t need much more tinkering beyond errors (even though the fielding bias still exists).

Leave a Reply