PDA

View Full Version : Will the real Jon Garland please stand up


BKozi
07-25-2003, 11:35 AM
I will admit that I used to cringe every time Jon Garland took the mound, but he has been pitching lights out lately. In his last 9 starts he is 4 and 2, but more importantly he gave up 2 runs or less in seven of those games and did not give up more than 4 runs in any of those starts (and one of them was an 8 inning, 3 hit, one run loss). He's brought his ERA down from 5.29 on June 10 to 4.40 after last nights game. Is this the Garland that we have all been waiting for? I don't think that he can be considered a dominant pitcher just yet, but at least he has been doing enough to give us a chance to win every game he starts. Keep it up Jonny-Boy!

FJA
07-25-2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by BKozi
I will admit that I used to cringe every time Jon Garland took the mound, but he has been pitching lights out lately. In his last 9 starts he is 4 and 2, but more importantly he gave up 2 runs or less in seven of those games and did not give up more than 4 runs in any of those starts (and one of them was an 8 inning, 3 hit, one run loss). He's brought his ERA down from 5.29 on June 10 to 4.40 after last nights game. Is this the Garland that we have all been waiting for? I don't think that he can be considered a dominant pitcher just yet, but at least he has been doing enough to give us a chance to win every game he starts. Keep it up Jonny-Boy!

I think this is the Garland we've all been waiting for. We'll see, though, how long he lasts. Normally I don't put a lot of stock in Ed Farmer's analysis, but he mentioned something that, for once, made a lot of sense. He said that Garland has shown his talent since he was brought up in 2000, and as a pitcher, what you're waiting for is for him to turn that corner, where talent translates into consistency. Garland has been very consistent for the greater part of the season, and Farmer reads this as turning the corner. I tend to agree, because it's been a LONG time since Garland has had a big inning, which he used to be horrible about. Even in the early part of the season, he pitched well for the most part, but had a HUGE inning that killed him every time.

I think it will be another year or so before we know if it's for real (meaning that Garland is an awesome fixture in the rotation for years to come), but for now, I'd say he's absolutely living up to potential.

Tragg
07-25-2003, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by FJA
I think this is the Garland we've all been waiting for. We'll see, though, how long he lasts. Normally I don't put a lot of stock in Ed Farmer's analysis, but he mentioned something that, for once, made a lot of sense. He said that Garland has shown his talent since he was brought up in 2000, and as a pitcher, what you're waiting for is for him to turn that corner, where talent translates into consistency. Garland has been very consistent for the greater part of the season, and Farmer reads this as turning the corner.
I completely agree with Farmer - it's common for talented pitchers to be inconsistent in the major leagues for a year or two. I think the fact that MB didn't struggle when he came up, made some fans lose patience with garland (thereby suggesting some absurd trades using him as a throw-in to get an overrated player like weaver for example). There has been no need to cringe at all, as Garland has been solid for most of this year -

Irishsox1
07-25-2003, 12:45 PM
The thing I forget about Garland is that he's only 23. When he got his first MLB win, he was 20. I remember they gave him a N/A beer shower.

MarqSox
07-25-2003, 12:46 PM
Let's not forget ... This guy is 23.

23!!!!

Most 23-year-olds are just now getting to AAA, and here we have Jon Garland who already has 3 years under his belt. If he'd gotten good before now, it would have been phenomenal. As it is, he's still ahead of the usual curve. He's no Mark Prior, but Jon Garland will have a fantastic career 4 to 6 All Star Games, at least. He's definitely worth holding onto. In two year, it would not surprise me if he's a bonafide ace.

Gumshoe
07-25-2003, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
I think the fact that MB didn't struggle when he came up, made some fans lose patience with garland (thereby suggesting some absurd trades using him as a throw-in to get an overrated player like weaver for example). There has been no need to cringe at all, as Garland has been solid for most of this year -

Great point. My sentiments exactly. Remember when we were going for Erstad (who at the time would've been a FA at year's end?). That would have been one of the worst moves KW ever made, and that says a lot. You don't give up on guys that are this cheap and this young for ANYTHING --- it'll just get you into more trouble. Furthermore, he's a former Cub so his value you know will increase. (-:

I've always had faith in Garland. You have to try to develop young pitchers to win, and he has been worth the wait. I hope he continues. It's nice that we're going well late. Let's keep it going. It's also fun watching a team on a win streak just to see if they can keep it going.

Gumshoe

D'Angelo F Death
07-25-2003, 12:57 PM
I'm sure the Cubs don't wish they still had Dontrelle Willis & Jon Garland to round out the rotation.

Gumshoe
07-25-2003, 01:49 PM
I love how the Cubbies are pumped so much when they are clearly 1-2 years away from having an established rotation that can win in spite of lack of offense. Now they are totally down the tubes! they are under .500 and a "crappy" Sox team has a better record AND is fewer games out of 1st. Oh the Cub irony.

G

BKozi
07-25-2003, 02:13 PM
You all make really good points. I do realize that he is 23 and I believed that he would eventually become an excellent pitcher. But the point that I was trying to make is that when you are in a divisional race, it doesn't matter how old or how much potential a pitcher has, you need your entire starting rotation to pitch well each and every start. We don't have the luxury of letting a starter get hit around. Garland hadn't been consistently getting quality starts up until the last 9 games. You're right, it would have been crazy to give up on him and trade him but it would have been nice to see him get more of a chance to mature in the minors and be polished when he made his major league debut. We didn't have that luxury, so he might have been on the mound before he was ready. But with the way he's been pitching lately, it's nice to be able to expect a quality start from him each time he goes out there. That's a great confidence builder heading into the stretch.

gosox41
07-26-2003, 01:20 AM
Originally posted by MarqSox
Let's not forget ... This guy is 23.

23!!!!

Most 23-year-olds are just now getting to AAA, and here we have Jon Garland who already has 3 years under his belt. If he'd gotten good before now, it would have been phenomenal. As it is, he's still ahead of the usual curve. He's no Mark Prior, but Jon Garland will have a fantastic career 4 to 6 All Star Games, at least. He's definitely worth holding onto. In two year, it would not surprise me if he's a bonafide ace.

But the problem is by bringing up Garland at such a young age, the Sox are probably going to lose him when's a free agent. Maybe if they didn't bring him up so early then Garland would have matured more in the minors and the Sox can take advanage of this for a longer peiod of time in the majors.

Bob

doublem23
07-26-2003, 03:06 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
But the problem is by bringing up Garland at such a young age, the Sox are probably going to lose him when's a free agent. Maybe if they didn't bring him up so early then Garland would have matured more in the minors and the Sox can take advanage of this for a longer peiod of time in the majors.

Bob

Well then I guess there's only one thing to do... Win it all now.

Good movie quote (or, possibly, paraphrase).

JRIG
07-26-2003, 12:07 PM
Garland's been great for a while now this year. He's allowed 2 ER of less in 10 of his last 13 starts. And he hasn't done it against all weak teams -- Toronto twice, Minnesota twice and San Francisco are all in that streak. I'm very very happy right now with a front four of Loaiza, Buehrle, Colon, and Garland.

soxtalker
07-26-2003, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by JRIG
Garland's been great for a while now this year. He's allowed 2 ER of less in 10 of his last 13 starts. And he hasn't done it against all weak teams -- Toronto twice, Minnesota twice and San Francisco are all in that streak. I'm very very happy right now with a front four of Loaiza, Buehrle, Colon, and Garland.

When do each of these leave, assuming the Sox are unwilling to sign them to long-term, high-salary contracts?

voodoochile
07-26-2003, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by soxtalker
When do each of these leave, assuming the Sox are unwilling to sign them to long-term, high-salary contracts?

Buehrle is a FA after 2 more years or arbitration (I think). It might be 3.

Garland hasn't entered arbitration yet either.

The Sox have an option year on Loaiza for next year.

Colon is a FA after the season.

gosox41
07-26-2003, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Well then I guess there's only one thing to do... Win it all now.

Good movie quote (or, possibly, paraphrase).

Sounds good to me.

Bob

Iwritecode
07-26-2003, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by doublem23
Well then I guess there's only one thing to do... Win it all now.

Good movie quote (or, possibly, paraphrase).

Taylor: "Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do..."

Hayes: "What's that?"

Taylor: "Win the whole ******* thing."





I luv that movie. :D: