PDA

View Full Version : Sox Interested in Freddy Garcia?


dougs78
11-14-2003, 08:28 AM
Story from the Seattle Times about the Sox potential interest in Freddy Garcia. Apparently he is one of Ozzies best friends.

The story mentions Lee and Ordonez, but Lee doesn't make much sense considering they project Garcia to make 8-9 million next season through arbitration.

I've always like Garcia, but to tell the truth I'd not be interested in trading either of those guys for him at that price.


Sox interested in Garcia? (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2001790999_mari14.html)

OEO Magglio
11-14-2003, 08:56 AM
It seems so far this offseason that the sox are interested in every player, but they can't afford anyone....... weird!

hold2dibber
11-14-2003, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by OEO Magglio
It seems so far this offseason that the sox are interested in every player, but they can't afford anyone....... weird!

My biggest concern is that they seem to be interested in really expensive players who aren't any good. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think they should be looking for really inexpensive players who are good.

By the way, how the hell can Freddy Garcia be project to get $9 million in arbitration? He wasn't even as good as Jon Garland last year.

Jjav829
11-14-2003, 09:21 AM
Freddy Garcia, Too Drinky! Stay away from him. Especially at his expected price for next year. I fail to see how that would help us at all.

dougs78
11-14-2003, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
By the way, how the hell can Freddy Garcia be project to get $9 million in arbitration? He wasn't even as good as Jon Garland last year.

I was wondering the same thing. Although he was better than Garland. He had a real nice streak in about July I think where he went like 6-0 with a 3.00 era. Overall his numbers were average, but when he was bad, he was very awful. But still, that doesn't seem like a 9 million per year guy.

jimrio1970
11-14-2003, 09:25 AM
NO!!!!!

Why don't we go after Javier Vasquez if we really want pitching?

hold2dibber
11-14-2003, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
I was wondering the same thing. Although he was better than Garland. He had a real nice streak in about July I think where he went like 6-0 with a 3.00 era. Overall his numbers were average, but when he was bad, he was very awful. But still, that doesn't seem like a 9 million per year guy.

If you compare their numbers (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_sortable_player_stats.jsp?section2=null&statSet2=null&sortByStat=W&statType=2&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=2003&baseballScope=AL&prevPage2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&subScope=pos&teamPosCode=1&box27=XXXX150119seaX&box28=XXXX279782chaX&compare.x=30&compare.y=6), Garland and Garcia had almost identical years, overall. Exact same ERA, almost the same WHIP, almost the same number of innings, almost the same W-L record. One big difference is that Garcia pitched in a GREAT pitcher's park. In any event, paying $8 or $9 million for Garcia would be absolutely nuts. He's a $3 mm pitcher, at best, at this point.

Of course, if they'd take Konerko for Garcia, I'd do that in a heart beat.

MisterB
11-14-2003, 10:31 AM
One quote confused me:

One rumor in October suggested that the Mariners had talked to the Yankees about Garcia, and asked for Alfonso Soriano, with the idea of playing him in center field.

Both Winn and Ichiro are capable of playing CF, yet they are thinking to put Soriano there? If this is any indication of the Mariners new direction, look for them to fade with Bavasi at the helm.

habibharu
11-14-2003, 10:44 AM
ANYBODY HEARD ABOUT THIS?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2001790999_mari14.html

Randar68
11-14-2003, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by jimrio1970
NO!!!!!

Why don't we go after Javier Vasquez if we really want pitching?

I think you meant that in deeppink.

Anyways, Garcia is a talented guy. His mechanics were all OVER the place this year, and he's had a long history of injuries. If you could guarantee me he would be injury free, I'd take a chance. He's a top 10 pitcher in the AL when he's right. However, Maggs or Lee is a high price.

No way in hell he get's anywhere near 9 million in arbitration after his injury history and the season he just came off of. 5-6 million would be a cry for a revision of the arbitration system, IMO.

Randar68
11-14-2003, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
If you compare their numbers (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_sortable_player_stats.jsp?section2=null&statSet2=null&sortByStat=W&statType=2&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=2003&baseballScope=AL&prevPage2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&subScope=pos&teamPosCode=1&box27=XXXX150119seaX&box28=XXXX279782chaX&compare.x=30&compare.y=6), Garland and Garcia had almost identical years, overall. Exact same ERA, almost the same WHIP, almost the same number of innings, almost the same W-L record. One big difference is that Garcia pitched in a GREAT pitcher's park. In any event, paying $8 or $9 million for Garcia would be absolutely nuts. He's a $3 mm pitcher, at best, at this point.

Of course, if they'd take Konerko for Garcia, I'd do that in a heart beat.

With Olerud and Martinez on their last legs, I'm not so sure that isn't what would actually be discussed/

MHOUSE
11-14-2003, 10:53 AM
please Kenny, NO! I don't care how much potential he has, the kid sucks. Just look at his numbers and all the crap Seattle dealt with. The only way I'd do it is if it were for almost nothing.

kittle42
11-14-2003, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by jimrio1970
NO!!!!!

Why don't we go after Javier Vasquez if we really want pitching?

Why is that in teal?

voodoochile
11-14-2003, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by habibharu
ANYBODY HEARD ABOUT THIS?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/mariners/2001790999_mari14.html

Welcome aboard! :D:

maurice
11-14-2003, 12:14 PM
Several months ago, I identified Seattle as a team that: (1) may be looking to add a big bat corner OF + a Japanese SS (depending on their budget), and (2) had starting pitching depth + a decent SS to move. Unfortunately, when the Sox picked up Valentin's option, I lost all hope that they might upgrade our defense at SS. Now, I have very little hope that they'll acquire the quality starter they desperately need. In short, I'm sure the Sox will be involved in at least one big trade, but I doubt that the outcome of the trade will be beneficial.

Foulke You
11-14-2003, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
One big difference is that Garcia pitched in a GREAT pitcher's park. In any event, paying $8 or $9 million for Garcia would be absolutely nuts. He's a $3 mm pitcher, at best, at this point.

Of course, if they'd take Konerko for Garcia, I'd do that in a heart beat.

An argument could be made that the Cell is a good pitcher's park with it's relatively deep gaps and swirling winds that knock down balls at the warning track. (See last year's HR Derby) However, I do agree that Safeco is larger and probably more of a pitcher's park than the Cell.

I also agree that Garcia is not worth $8-9 million. Perhaps $4-5 million if he is healthy. When he is healthy he can be an extremely effective pitcher. However, I don't want to give up Lee or Ordonez to get him. I would definitly trade Konerko for Garcia though if they bit on it but the Sox would probably have to eat some of that contract.

Brian26
11-14-2003, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by Foulke You
An argument could be made that the Cell is a good pitcher's park with it's relatively deep gaps and swirling winds that knock down balls at the warning track.

I'm at work right now, so I don't have the source, but I actually read that the Cell is one of the top 3 hitters parks in the league.

MarkEdward
11-14-2003, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Brian26
I'm at work right now, so I don't have the source, but I actually read that the Cell is one of the top 3 hitters parks in the league.

According to Park Factors, the Cell was actually a bit of a pitchers' park this year (99/99).

Offhand, I'd think the top three hitters' parks are Bank One, Kauffman, and Coors.

dougs78
11-14-2003, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
If you compare their numbers (http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_sortable_player_stats.jsp?section2=null&statSet2=null&sortByStat=W&statType=2&timeFrame=1&timeSubFrame=2003&baseballScope=AL&prevPage2=1&readBoxes=true&sitSplit=&venueID=&subScope=pos&teamPosCode=1&box27=XXXX150119seaX&box28=XXXX279782chaX&compare.x=30&compare.y=6), Garland and Garcia had almost identical years, overall. Exact same ERA, almost the same WHIP, almost the same number of innings, almost the same W-L record. One big difference is that Garcia pitched in a GREAT pitcher's park. In any event, paying $8 or $9 million for Garcia would be absolutely nuts. He's a $3 mm pitcher, at best, at this point.

Of course, if they'd take Konerko for Garcia, I'd do that in a heart beat.

I clearly didn't check the numbers, thats pretty amazing. To tell the truth the reason I thought Garcia was better was probably because he was on my fantasy team this year and I was constantly trying to convince myself he'd turn it around.

No wonder he was killing my pitching staff all year :(:

Of course, all that being said, when hes on, hes a bigtime stud. He arguably should have won the Cy Young in 2001 and when he was on last year, he was great.

valposoxfan
11-14-2003, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
According to Park Factors, the Cell was actually a bit of a pitchers' park this year (99/99).

Offhand, I'd think the top three hitters' parks are Bank One, Kauffman, and Coors.

Bank One?? I severely doubt it. Hows about Fenway or Wrigley. Pac Bell is also not a bad ballpark to hit in. Or Edison Field for that matter. Freddy Garcia is an absolute bust. Kenny will not make this move I guarantee it. Too much baggage and inconsistency on this guy.

Brian26
11-14-2003, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by MarkEdward
According to Park Factors, the Cell was actually a bit of a pitchers' park this year (99/99).

Offhand, I'd think the top three hitters' parks are Bank One, Kauffman, and Coors.

I said one of the top 3 in the AL. I'm almost positive...
Amazing that you would rate Kauffman up there since that used to be a nightmare to hit homers in before they moved in the fences.

voodoochile
11-14-2003, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by valposoxfan
Bank One?? I severely doubt it. Hows about Fenway or Wrigley. Pac Bell is also not a bad ballpark to hit in. Or Edison Field for that matter. Freddy Garcia is an absolute bust. Kenny will not make this move I guarantee it. Too much baggage and inconsistency on this guy.

Wrigley actually rates as a pitcher's park.

fuzzy_patters
11-14-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Wrigley actually rates as a pitcher's park.

That is because the wind blows in for two months, and they do not own a lawn mower.

Foulke You
11-14-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Wrigley actually rates as a pitcher's park.

Wrigley is too dependent on weather factors to be consistently called a pitcher's park. On a cool night game, with the wind blowing in from the lake? Yes. For sure it is a pitcher's park then. But on a nice day with a breeze blowing out. Forget about it. Wrigley turns into the biggest joke in baseball. Launching Pad #1. Especially with it's 363 foot "power alley" basket shots.

Top 3 hitters parks in my opinion:
1. Minute Maid Park (formerly Enron)
2. Coors Field
3. Wrigley Field

Top 3 pitchers parks in my opinion:
1. Comerica Park
2. Safeco Field
3. Dodgers Stadium

washington
11-14-2003, 02:40 PM
IMO Wrigley is increasingly classified as a pitcher's park because so many of the new NL parks are hitter-friendly with shorter foul lines and power alleys. 20 years ago I bet Wrigley was near the top of the list as being a hitters' park, even accounting for the days when the wind blows in.

voodoochile
11-14-2003, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by fuzzy_patters


That is because the wind blows in for two months, and they do not own a lawn mower.


Originally posted by Foulke You


Wrigley is too dependent on weather factors to be consistently called a pitcher's park. On a cool night game, with the wind blowing in from the lake? Yes. For sure it is a pitcher's park then. But on a nice day with a breeze blowing out. Forget about it. Wrigley turns into the biggest joke in baseball. Launching Pad #1. Especially with it's 363 foot "power alley" basket shots.

Top 3 hitters parks in my opinion:
1. Minute Maid Park (formerly Enron)
2. Coors Field
3. Wrigley Field

Top 3 pitchers parks in my opinion:
1. Comerica Park
2. Safeco Field
3. Dodgers Stadium

I agree. It is because of the lake breeze and when the wind is out of the west, it gets ugly fast. Still, for the most part, the wind blows in.

gosox41
11-14-2003, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
My biggest concern is that they seem to be interested in really expensive players who aren't any good. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think they should be looking for really inexpensive players who are good.

By the way, how the hell can Freddy Garcia be project to get $9 million in arbitration? He wasn't even as good as Jon Garland last year.


:KW
$9 million????? Iwas going to give Colon's money.

Bob

RichH55
11-14-2003, 11:08 PM
Unless it is Garcia for Konerko I just don't see it making all that much sense

Chisoxfn
11-15-2003, 03:22 AM
Originally posted by Foulke You
Wrigley is too dependent on weather factors to be consistently called a pitcher's park. On a cool night game, with the wind blowing in from the lake? Yes. For sure it is a pitcher's park then. But on a nice day with a breeze blowing out. Forget about it. Wrigley turns into the biggest joke in baseball. Launching Pad #1. Especially with it's 363 foot "power alley" basket shots.

Top 3 hitters parks in my opinion:
1. Minute Maid Park (formerly Enron)
2. Coors Field
3. Wrigley Field

Top 3 pitchers parks in my opinion:
1. Comerica Park
2. Safeco Field
3. Dodgers Stadium

For pitchers parks, I'd add Network Associates in that group. All that foul ground and the ball rarely jumps out of the park.

Tragg
11-15-2003, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
My biggest concern is that they seem to be interested in really expensive players who aren't any good. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think they should be looking for really inexpensive players who are good.

By the way, how the hell can Freddy Garcia be project to get $9 million in arbitration? He wasn't even as good as Jon Garland last year.

Isn't that the truth.
Garcia is another Weaver - lots of gammons hype, but the numbers tell the story