Danks never had Hurley’s injury history. He also struck out significantly more batters and he’s picked up a little more velocity as he’s matured. Danks’ biggest flaw has always been command, specifically being too aggressive in the strike zone for his own good and lacking consistency with his curveball. The addition of the cutter (giving him a third pitch he can rely on) and the velocity jump, along with the expected general improvement in command, has turned him into a beast. Three plus pitches, and that doesn’t even include his curve, which is very inconsistent but shows impressive potential. I suspect he’s better suited for throwing a slider as his breaker rather than a curve, though.

Hurley wasn’t going to boast that kind of repertoire. Solid fastball, good slider, not much else. I don’t think the Rangers really developed him poorly - yes, his stuff did level off, but if his command had worked out he still would have been an interesting guy for the middle of a rotation. As it is . . .not prepared to say anything definite just yet, but it sure doesn’t look good.

I kindof echo the sentiment about Hurley, nobody is 100/100 on their lists, just as top prospects aren’t 100% to make it. Hurley’s stuff was a bit exposed as he hit the higher minor league levels, but before this injury I felt he belonged in the 100-150 range. He could still bounce back, but the chances don’t look great. BTW, I don’t know anything about the 2 guys you mentioned, care to give an opinion about them? I’ve seen Holt’s name in passing, but that’s about it.