I was shocked a seeing the trade, but the White Sox do have a number of young arms who are in the higher minors. But, I don't think Guillen is the type of manager to hand a rotation with two or three rookies in it.
Posted by jarnold at 12/25/2006 4:12:00 PM |
| |
Being a Sox fan, I have to believe this stems from KW's belief that B-Mac is no better than a #3 starter and that Danks is a superior talent. I am not sure whether I agree with this, but if Danks and Gio pan out, that is a formidable 1-2 lefty punch near the top of a rotation in 2008-2009. Not sure that we are in decent shape in 2007 though, but another move could be up the sleeve.
Posted by slayer999 at 12/25/2006 5:09:00 PM |
| |
It is a bit of a head scratcher...B-Mac has proven himself able to pitch in the majors while Danks has not...you're right, the Sox must believe Danks is #1-2 material. Only time will tell.
Posted by cdgarosi at 12/26/2006 5:51:00 AM |
| |
If Danks was #1-2 material wouldn't you think Texas would just keep him? They're 1 of the top pitching starved teams in the league and I'm equally confused on both sides of this trade. I really don't understand why Texas would trade a prospect for McCarthy-- he isn't that dominating of a pitcher, nor will he be. Especially since some believe that Danks is just as good or better.
Posted by schwang2u at 12/26/2006 11:32:00 PM |
| |
On the other side, the White Sox told a few teams that McCarthy wasn't available in the past, and the dealing of Garcia was his chance to move into the starting rotation. Now all of a sudden he's dealt to Texas? The Sox have to believe Danks has the brighter upside, I just don't see any other reason for them to make this move.
Posted by schwang2u at 12/26/2006 11:41:00 PM |
| |
Maybe they're just stockpiling lefties to combat Hafner and Morneau? But that would be too short-sighted, right...
Posted by bscwik at 12/27/2006 10:08:00 AM |
| |
