PDA

View Full Version : Does anyone else want Garland gone??


GiveMeSox
08-29-2004, 03:34 PM
I have been saying this since almost June when his mature stepped up new persona and pitching fiddled back to a .500 pitcher at best with a 5.00 era. This guy makes me sick. His stuff and arsenal are way too conservative and so nothing special. A 4 seam fastball at 88-91 mph, a medicore curve that rarely gets over, a sinker that doens't sink, and a medicore change. Wow very impressive isn't it. He makes 2.3 mil this year and is not under contract for next year and i believe is due arbitration. Get him outta here he aint worth anything, not even a viable 5th starter because he never gets any big outs. Im dont with garland trade him now or let him go. We can get someone 10x better for 2-3 mil for next year.

beckett21
08-29-2004, 03:42 PM
Posting this today is like shooting fish in a barrel.


I'm going to take the unpopular position of sticking up for the kid and saying let's keep him around as a #5 for next year. We've invested this much time and money in him, I'm not ready to give up yet. He is still only 24 years old.

I fully expect to be publicly flogged, tarred and feathered, and subsequently drawn and quartered at USCF for this opinion. Excuse me while I retire to my underground hideout now. :redneck

kitekrazy
08-29-2004, 03:46 PM
I think he gets one more year. Most of our staff is not impressive. So far Contreras looks so much better than the rest.

jeremyb1
08-29-2004, 03:47 PM
I have been saying this since almost June when his mature stepped up new persona and pitching fiddled back to a .500 pitcher at best with a 5.00 era.[/color]

Strange that he fiddled back to a 5 ERA pitcher when his ERAs since he posted a 6.46 ERA in '00 at 21 have been 3.69, 4.58, 4.51, and this season 4.91 even after today's outing.

JGarlandrules20
08-29-2004, 03:52 PM
I'm going to take the unpopular position of sticking up for the kid and saying let's keep him around as a #5 for next year. We've invested this much time and money in him, I'm not ready to give up yet. He is still only 24 years old.
I agree! The guy has talent.. he just needs the mentality.

idseer
08-29-2004, 03:55 PM
Posting this today is like shooting fish in a barrel.


I'm going to take the unpopular position of sticking up for the kid and saying let's keep him around as a #5 for next year. We've invested this much time and money in him, I'm not ready to give up yet. He is still only 24 years old.

I fully expect to be publicly flogged, tarred and feathered, and subsequently drawn and quartered at USCF for this opinion. Excuse me while I retire to my underground hideout now. :redneck
what do you expect from someone who can't even pick out teal for his sarcasm/

soxtalker
08-29-2004, 04:04 PM
This may not the optimal time to be trading Garland. Hopefully, he can come back next year and pitch a bit better. I do find it a bit strange that we focus on him. He gave up 6 runs. That isn't good. However, as kitecrazy pointed out, I don't recall a lot of stellar performances lately by our staff. So, while Garland may be the worst of the lot (except for the #5), I'm not sure that he's that much worse.

The overall problems of the staff do concern me. Maybe this is just symptomatic of baseball these days, or perhaps it reflects the ease of hitting HR at the Cell after last year's renovations.

GiveMeSox
08-29-2004, 04:16 PM
This may not the optimal time to be trading Garland. Hopefully, he can come back next year and pitch a bit better. I do find it a bit strange that we focus on him. He gave up 6 runs. That isn't good. However, as kitecrazy pointed out, I don't recall a lot of stellar performances lately by our staff. So, while Garland may be the worst of the lot (except for the #5), I'm not sure that he's that much worse.

The overall problems of the staff do concern me. Maybe this is just symptomatic of baseball these days, or perhaps it reflects the ease of hitting HR at the Cell after last year's renovations.
KW says pitching carries a team, he says pitching is what wins and thats what he cares about most. He says all that but it doens't materialize. This team doesn't have 1 domination pitcher, its has 4 whose ERA ususually 4 or greater and a bad bullpen. I would argue to say the problem is KW being to stubborn when it comes to expectation of our guys. If they are not getting the job done time and time again, cough crede cough garland, what makes him think they will magically turn it around at the blink of an eye. Maybe slow improvement or something, but we have yet to see that either.

SpartanSoxFan
08-29-2004, 04:31 PM
Guess who else should be on the outs that happens to be 24 years old??? Joe "I constantly have a moronic expression on my face" Borchard.

calderon
08-29-2004, 04:40 PM
I'm tired of hearing about Garlands potential, if he was let go, I would not be upset.

dcb33
08-29-2004, 04:43 PM
I have been saying this since almost June when his mature stepped up new persona and pitching fiddled back to a .500 pitcher at best with a 5.00 era. This guy makes me sick. His stuff and arsenal are way too conservative and so nothing special. A 4 seam fastball at 88-91 mph, a medicore curve that rarely gets over, a sinker that doens't sink, and a medicore change. Wow very impressive isn't it. He makes 2.3 mil this year and is not under contract for next year and i believe is due arbitration. Get him outta here he aint worth anything, not even a viable 5th starter because he never gets any big outs. Im dont with garland trade him now or let him go. We can get someone 10x better for 2-3 mil for next year.No offense, but
:threadsucks
In case you hadn't noticed, we don't run or own the White Sox, and the people who do have made it clear that Garland will be back next year, end of discussion. He is a mental midget and immature, and his performance this year (his alleged break out year) has indicated that his highly touted talent may never pan out.
That being said, I'd take a pitcher with a 5 ERA and 9-10 recordin the 5th spot of the rotation any day of the week, and if KW got rid of Judy, he'd need to find two starting pitchers for next year instead of just one.
I can live with Judy as a 5th starter.
I can't live with seeing the Sox call up Felix Diaz, Arnie Munoz, Josh Stewart, Grilli, and whatever other garbage we have in our minor leagues to pitch every 5th day because our management can't find 5 legitimate starters, and getting rid of Garland will not make it any easier to get rid of this same old song and dance...

santo=dorf
08-29-2004, 04:51 PM
I agree! The guy has talent.. he just needs the mentality.
Too bad you can't teach mentality. Show Jon the door please.

:valet :ritchie :bkoch: :jaime

"Right this way Jon."

Lem_Siddons
08-29-2004, 04:52 PM
Garland will be hanging around the Christmas tree and hanging around the rotation. As long as he's counted on as the #5, he'll be fine.

dcb33
08-29-2004, 04:59 PM
Too bad you can't teach mentality. Show Jon the door please.

:valet :ritchie :bkoch: :jaime

"Right this way Jon."
You can say that now, just don't complain when the Sox don't have 5 solid starters going into next year. I'm sure most teams in the majors would be more than happy to have someone like Garland be their 5th starter....

DVsoxfan
08-29-2004, 05:20 PM
Garland is still young. If we sign a Pavano type in the offseason, then I say keep him as the 5th starter. He'd be one of the better, if not best, 5th starters in all of baseball. If we trade him, we simply cannot count on signing 2 top notch pitchers in the offseason. Otherwise if we sign one top pitcher then we'll end up with the same problems. We'd have a solid 1-4, and a questionable #5. Give him one more yr., then dump him. I agree that we have invested a lot in this kid, and he has great talent. Something with his mentality needs to be changed. Some how, some way he needs to be toughened up.

JB98
08-29-2004, 05:52 PM
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to get aboard the "Dump Garland Bandwagon." Unfortunately, we can't afford to do that unless a viable alternative emerges. Look at the crap we have among the starting pitchers in our minor-league system. I've really soured on Garland these last couple months. He's taken two huge steps back, IMO. However, he's still better than Diaz, Stewart, Munoz, et al.

My gut feeling is Garland will be back with the Sox next year. I can only hope and pray that he won't be counted upon to be anything more than a No. 5 starter. It would be OK to blame his struggles on youth, if he were actually showing improvement. This season has been a move in the wrong direction from him.

SOXSINCE'70
08-29-2004, 06:03 PM
Every time I want to toss this cavalier clod out on his ear and kick him to the curb with Monday morning's trash,I realise it took Sandy Koufax 6 (yes,6) years to become the dominant pitcher he became from 1961-66.Previously the story was almost like Judy's.Everyone knew he had the "stuff",it was just a matter of trusting his "stuff".One more year.Judy better realise 2005 is a make or break season for him.:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:


I've waited 34 years for a champioship.What's 34 more?? (68):D: :D:

soxlover
08-29-2004, 06:15 PM
I think we are being too hard on Garland. It's obvious he's trying as hard as he can to win games.

PaulDrake
08-29-2004, 06:35 PM
Every time I want to toss this cavalier clod out on his ear and kick him to the curb with Monday morning's trash,I realise it took Sandy Koufax 6 (yes,6) years to become the dominant pitcher he became from 1961-66.Previously the story was almost like Judy's.Everyone knew he had the "stuff",it was just a matter of trusting his "stuff".One more year.Judy better realise 2005 is a make or break season for him.:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:


I've waited 34 years for a champioship.What's 34 more?? (68):D: :D: Garland's "stuff" in no way, shape or form even begins to compare with Koufax. Even the Koufax of 1955-60.

SEALgep
08-29-2004, 06:57 PM
Something with his mentality needs to be changed. Some how, some way he needs to be toughened up.I'm just worried that it has less to do with mentality, and more to do with personality.

petekat
08-29-2004, 07:30 PM
support you on this one. buy low sell high. the "kid" is only 24- much like all the Crede bashers, what's the use in giving up on them now. Jus mark this season down as lost- and start building for the next campaign. Unless you can get someone to ovepay for Garland's potential- no point in giving up on him now. Much as I dislike Billy Beane, he may have a point about ignoring prospects in their teens. For every Cabrera and Andruw Jones- you have a Beltre, Crede, or Garland--- now Beltre is starting to turn it around after everyone wrote him off



Posting this today is like shooting fish in a barrel.


I'm going to take the unpopular position of sticking up for the kid and saying let's keep him around as a #5 for next year. We've invested this much time and money in him, I'm not ready to give up yet. He is still only 24 years old.

I fully expect to be publicly flogged, tarred and feathered, and subsequently drawn and quartered at USCF for this opinion. Excuse me while I retire to my underground hideout now. :redneck

Lip Man 1
08-29-2004, 07:45 PM
Folks:

Let's be clear on a few points please.

Jon Garland is no longer a 'kid.' He's 24 years old but more importantly he's been in the major league for over four years now. He has had over 100 career starts.

He can no longer use the fact that he doesn't have the experience as an excuse. It doesn't wash.

He doesn't 'get it' and frankly I don't think he ever will 'get it.'

The Sox need to deal him this off season before the other 29 MLB clubs figure out the same thing. Then the Sox won't get a thing for him when he walks in two years as a free agent.

Deal him this Winter while you can get something and maybe he simply needs a change of scenery.

Lip

nccwsfan
08-29-2004, 08:30 PM
Folks:

Let's be clear on a few points please.

Jon Garland is no longer a 'kid.' He's 24 years old but more importantly he's been in the major league for over four years now. He has had over 100 career starts.

He can no longer use the fact that he doesn't have the experience as an excuse. It doesn't wash.

He doesn't 'get it' and frankly I don't think he ever will 'get it.'

The Sox need to deal him this off season before the other 29 MLB clubs figure out the same thing. Then the Sox won't get a thing for him when he walks in two years as a free agent.

Deal him this Winter while you can get something and maybe he simply needs a change of scenery.

Lip
Jon Garland should be the #5 pitcher in the rotation, and hopefully KW will use the offseason to fill the final piece of the rotation, whether it be at 1,2,3, or 4:

Buehrle
Garcia
Contreras
Mr. Fill in the Blank
Garland

If it appeases the JG bashers I could see them bringing in another starter to spur some competition in spring training, but since they have other holes to fill I'd be content with a 10 win, 4.50 ERA(season's not over yet), and 15 quality starts at #5.

CubsfansareDRUNK
08-29-2004, 08:31 PM
IMO, Garland used to be awsome. What happened to the guy? He SUCKS now

Viva Magglio
08-29-2004, 08:33 PM
Jon Garland makes me hide under the covers.

RichFitztightly
08-29-2004, 10:08 PM
I'm as upset at Garland's performance lately as anyone here. However, he does do somethings right. His sinker down and in to lefties is the first semblance of a strikeout pitch I've seen from him. It's very effective. If he can develop something similar to throw to righties he could be devastating. However, he hasn't figured out that you have to make your strikes look like balls and your balls look like strikes. What he tries to do is put the ball on a corner. He's basically a 2-dimensional (inside corner/outside corner) pitcher. As we all seem to know here, that's no way to be successful.

santo=dorf
08-29-2004, 10:30 PM
I'm as upset at Garland's performance lately as anyone here. However, he does do somethings right. His sinker down and in to lefties is the first semblance of a strikeout pitch I've seen from him. It's very effective. If he can develop something similar to throw to righties he could be devastating. However, he hasn't figured out that you have to make your strikes look like balls and your balls look like strikes. What he tries to do is put the ball on a corner. He's basically a 2-dimensional (inside corner/outside corner) pitcher. As we all seem to know here, that's no way to be successful.
Jon Garland with a strikeout pitch?!?!?! His K/BB ratio is 1.5. That is pathetic for someone who at the start of the season was supposed to be a #3.

dcb33
08-29-2004, 10:36 PM
Jon Garland with a strikeout pitch?!?!?! His K/BB ratio is 1.5. That is pathetic for someone who at the start of the season was supposed to be a #3.
YO! If Garland leaves I don't want to hear you complain when we have to see Schoeny or whoever the hell else they bring up from the minor leagues to cover the lower spots in our rotation!

santo=dorf
08-29-2004, 11:15 PM
YO! If Garland leaves I don't want to hear you complain when we have to see Schoeny or whoever the hell else they bring up from the minor leagues to cover the lower spots in our rotation!Look, If Garland is our fifth starter for next year, I want him to be used the same way we used all of our other fifth starters this year. He only pitches if there isn't an off day. Personally, I would like to see our rotation like the Cubs where they go 1-5 regardless of an off day. This also allows our 1-4 starters to get an extra day of rest.

Bisco Stu
08-30-2004, 12:32 AM
As long as he is our 5th starter, I have no problem with Garland remaining in the rotation. He's obviously an improvement over the 5th starters the last two seasons. But only as a 5th starter.

BainesHOF
08-30-2004, 12:46 AM
We need to get rid of Garland. Beyond his poor pitching and regression, his attitude is poor. He's been a part of our problem for the past two, three years. He must go.

There are reasons we have underachieved in the past two, three years. Garland is a poster boy for our underachievement and lack of fire.

Pluse he's dumb, and his pitching has always reflected that.

jeremyb1
08-30-2004, 01:08 AM
Look, If Garland is our fifth starter for next year, I want him to be used the same way we used all of our other fifth starters this year. He only pitches if there isn't an off day. Personally, I would like to see our rotation like the Cubs where they go 1-5 regardless of an off day. This also allows our 1-4 starters to get an extra day of rest.

The best fifth starter in baseball is probably Mark Redman and his run is less than half a run lower than Garland's. How good of a pitcher can you reasonably expect to have in the fifth spot?

SOXit2EM
08-30-2004, 02:19 AM
Do any of you guys check out stats? i am just as disappointed in Garland this year as the rest of you, but he has not been THAT bad this year as his era may suggest. I know as of late he has been getting rocked, but he has also had quite a few quality starts this year, as well as win some big games early in the season for us. if you guys took a look at most teams in the AL, you would see that Garland has a better era than most teams 4th starter. So if he was our #5 starter next year, we would be in great shape. If you dont believe me, check out these #4s, on playoff contenders....Yankees 4th starter, Mussina, 116 ip, 140 hits, 5.34 era, Minnesota, Lohse 156 ip, 196 hits, 5.35 era. Anaheim, Lackey 156 ip, 172 hits, 5.00 era, and Boston, Lowe 151 ip, 183 hits, 5.22 era. The only playoff team that has a better #4 than us is Oakland. So say what you guys want about Garland, but he is a good #4 starter. I hope next year he is our #5, and we pick up either Zito or Pavano.

SEALgep
08-30-2004, 06:43 AM
The best fifth starter in baseball is probably Mark Redman and his run is less than half a run lower than Garland's. How good of a pitcher can you reasonably expect to have in the fifth spot?Garland would most likely be a suitable fifth starter, but you have to understand that he was thought to be much more than that. Some people thought he was going to be a 20 game winner this year. He simply hasn't put it together yet. Maybe he will, maybe it will take a change of scenery, who knows. However, right now, he isn't where he needs to be, and he's had plenty of time and patience given to him to get there. We'll see what happens, but I'm not ruling out an additional pitcher FA acquisition to replace Garland, although it probably won't happen.

nccwsfan
08-30-2004, 06:55 AM
Garland would most likely be a suitable fifth starter, but you have to understand that he was thought to be much more than that. Some people thought he was going to be a 20 game winner this year. He simply hasn't put it together yet. Maybe he will, maybe it will take a change of scenery, who knows. However, right now, he isn't where he needs to be, and he's had plenty of time and patience given to him to get there. We'll see what happens, but I'm not ruling out an additional pitcher FA acquisition to replace Garland, although it probably won't happen.
That's the thing- the people that are most eager to see Garland go say so because 'he didn't live up to expectations', when it's more along the lines of 'our expectations of him are too high'. If someone is expecting 17-20 wins/3.00 ERA from Jon Garland they're never going to be happy and they'll want him gone. Garland is throwing a quality start on (virtually) every other start, will collect 10 to 12 wins this season with a 4.50 ERA. If our current 5th starter spot collected 10 wins this season we'd be talking a lot more about catching the Twins.

Garland can pitch, just not at the level we all thought he could.

SpringfldFan
08-30-2004, 08:24 AM
Just tell me one thing. How many more years are we going to hear the "he is only ___ years old" explanation?

Dick Allen
08-30-2004, 09:16 AM
Garland's "stuff" in no way, shape or form even begins to compare with Koufax. Even the Koufax of 1955-60.Koufax's biggest problem, if I remember correctly, was that he couldn't find the plate early in his career. You're right, comparing Garland's stuff to a hall-of-famer's is ridiculous.

Flight #24
08-30-2004, 10:26 AM
Folks:

Let's be clear on a few points please.

Jon Garland is no longer a 'kid.' He's 24 years old but more importantly he's been in the major league for over four years now. He has had over 100 career starts.

He can no longer use the fact that he doesn't have the experience as an excuse. It doesn't wash.

He doesn't 'get it' and frankly I don't think he ever will 'get it.'

The Sox need to deal him this off season before the other 29 MLB clubs figure out the same thing. Then the Sox won't get a thing for him when he walks in two years as a free agent.

Deal him this Winter while you can get something and maybe he simply needs a change of scenery.

Lip
Get what? He's an excellent #5 starter or a average to slightly below average #4. That's what he is. There's nothing to "get" except that as a fact.

Unless you realistically think that you're going to have Pavano and Clement duking it out for the #4 and 5 slots, Jon Garland's as good or better than almost any #5 you'll find on the market. And he's better than the #5 on most teams, including playoff teams.

About the only reason I can see for letting him go is if you can get something good in terms of prospects, and/or if his arbitration award is likely to be reasonable. Otherwise, if he's cheap (around 2.5mil), I don't know that you'll find much in terms of an upgrade. Which means you keep him and slot him #5.

balke
08-30-2004, 10:52 AM
Get what? He's an excellent #5 starter or a average to slightly below average #4. That's what he is. There's nothing to "get" except that as a fact.

Unless you realistically think that you're going to have Pavano and Clement duking it out for the #4 and 5 slots, Jon Garland's as good or better than almost any #5 you'll find on the market. And he's better than the #5 on most teams, including playoff teams.

About the only reason I can see for letting him go is if you can get something good in terms of prospects, and/or if his arbitration award is likely to be reasonable. Otherwise, if he's cheap (around 2.5mil), I don't know that you'll find much in terms of an upgrade. Which means you keep him and slot him #5.
The most important word there is cheap. He's going to have an ERA under 5 at seasons end, and only cost the sox 2.5 mil. That's better than bringing someone in to do the same for 9 mil (which we can only hope doesn't happen with our pickups this season or buerhle. with a good 5-man rotation, I would expect under 4, maybe one pitcher under 3 next season depending on who our pick-up is in the offseason)

jshanahanjr
08-30-2004, 11:49 AM
Trade or non tender him. I'm sick of the jerk!

Flight #24
08-30-2004, 11:52 AM
Trade or non tender him. I'm sick of the jerk!
Well, when you put it that way, who cares about worsening the team, making it more difficult to win next year, or having to go out and pay more for someone to do the same or worse job......As long as you're sick of him.

Lip Man 1
08-30-2004, 12:22 PM
From Joe Cowley's story in the Daily Southtown. In my opinion he sums it up pretty well.

"The White Sox have learned this season that Jon Garland is still not a big-game pitcher, that he's still prone to allowing big innings, that he'll point a finger at teammates after his own failures, and that he doesn't really care about fans.

To sum it up, they've learned the great expectations they had for the 24-year-old right-hander when the season started appear to be nothing more than a pipe dream."

Flight and others, the 'kid' has an attitude. I personally think he's a bad guy, and more importantly he seems to be a bad teammate.

Do you want that kind of guy around? If he wins 20 games you can live with it, but when he's mediocre at best?

Some of you need to think about the intangibles in addition to ERA, WHIP and all that other statistical crap.

Lip

jshanahanjr
08-30-2004, 12:27 PM
I think Lip hit the nail on the head. This guy is the Cade McNown of baseball. A major tool!

Flight #24
08-30-2004, 12:31 PM
Flight and others, the 'kid' has an attitude. I personally think he's a bad guy, and more importantly he seems to be a bad teammate.

Do you want that kind of guy around? If he wins 20 games you can live with it, but when he's mediocre at best?

Some of you need to think about the intangibles in addition to ERA, WHIP and all that other statistical crap.

Lip
If he is a bad guy, then get him out of there. But before this year, I'd never heard him referred to as that, it was more that he was quiet and maybe soft, but not that he was a bad teammate. So I'm inclined to discount a single event given that record. If there have been more incidents or if there's unreported stuff pissing people off, then sure - get rid of him. But it's going to be hard to replace his production at a similar salary. And like it or not, he gives you the production along with some promise of upside. You can't count on it anymore, but it is there, which is nice from a guy who's already a solid #5.

My point was that all the bashing of Jon and comments that people are tired of his continual failure to realize his potential are a bit foolish. Just because he's not and likely never will be a good #2 or 3 doesn't mean he should be dumped. Accept him for what he is - a very strong asset to this team as a #5 starter (assuming he's not a problem in the clubhouse).

nccwsfan
08-30-2004, 01:12 PM
I personally think he's a bad guy, and more importantly he seems to be a bad teammate.
You're entitled to your opinion as are all of us, but just because he 'seems' to be a bad teammate doesn't mean he's a bad teammate. Magglio 'seems' to want to be here, but since no one on these boards can prove it all we can do is make assumptions. Unless you have proof that Garland is a bad teammate it's only opinion.

Do you want that kind of guy around? If he wins 20 games you can live with it, but when he's mediocre at best?
He IS mediocre at best, and that's why a large majority of those speaking their minds here think he'd be best served as a #5 starter. I'm not reading too many who think he should be a #3 or #4.

Some of you need to think about the intangibles in addition to ERA, WHIP and all that other statistical crap.

Lip
Keeping someone who's been in the organization because they fit well into the team's payroll plan is a pretty big intangible to me.

So he hasn't lived up to expectations- so what? To those bashing JG, here's a direct question- what are you expecting from him?

balke
08-30-2004, 01:20 PM
IMO, if you're oging to dump garland, you might as well dump the team.

Next season you'll have dan wright in your 5 spot again, with expensive 4 star pitcerss, sup par D expensive injury prone Offense, and a bullpen you can't afford to fix.

I'll keep the guy around for the money. At least we'd have 5 pitchers who are decent. Then we can form a good defense, and possibly good offense, work a way towards fixing the bullpen with money saved.

He had one bad shout out the media because Guillen called him out... Guillen shouldn't be calling anyone out. If he was going to do that, he could've done it early in the season when it actually mattered. Instead he's caused the fans/media to turn on a young talented pitcher because he admitted the fact that our defense sucks.

Mohoney
08-30-2004, 03:32 PM
Next season you'll have dan wright in your 5 spot again, with expensive 4 star pitcerss, sup par D expensive injury prone Offense, and a bullpen you can't afford to fix.
Dan Wright is not going to be the 5th starter next season. He will still be rehabbing. Plus, as long as Garland is here, he will never be the 5th starter. He will always be relied upon to have a "breakout" season as a 4th starter, and our postseason hopes will suffer for it because no other moves will be made.

We have three quality pitchers, we need a 4th. As long as Garland remains in this organization, he will always be counted on to be that 4th quality pitcher, and I'm sorry, but it will never happen.

I don't care how young he is. The guy has made 121 starts, and pitched 747 innings, ample opportunity to show what he can and can't do at this level. All he has ever shown anybody in this time is maddening inconsistency, a propensity to give up the long ball, a propensity to give up a big inning almost every game, and a bad attitude.

Most importantly, however, is that he is digressing instead of improving. The whole thing about playing a young player is that he's supposed to improve year by year. Garland is simply spinning his wheels, and even taking a step backward.

We have to cut our losses with this guy and move on.

balke
08-30-2004, 04:13 PM
Dan Wright is not going to be the 5th starter next season. He will still be rehabbing. Plus, as long as Garland is here, he will never be the 5th starter. He will always be relied upon to have a "breakout" season as a 4th starter, and our postseason hopes will suffer for it because no other moves will be made.

We have three quality pitchers, we need a 4th. As long as Garland remains in this organization, he will always be counted on to be that 4th quality pitcher, and I'm sorry, but it will never happen.

I don't care how young he is. The guy has made 121 starts, and pitched 747 innings, ample opportunity to show what he can and can't do at this level. All he has ever shown anybody in this time is maddening inconsistency, a propensity to give up the long ball, a propensity to give up a big inning almost every game, and a bad attitude.

Most importantly, however, is that he is digressing instead of improving. The whole thing about playing a young player is that he's supposed to improve year by year. Garland is simply spinning his wheels, and even taking a step backward.

We have to cut our losses with this guy and move on.


our 10 losses to 9 wins. He's been on off month by month, had a bad june and bad august. he's slipping during a 4-man rotation at 24 years old. So he's not Josh beckett (5-8 4.39 ERA), or mark Prior (4-3 4.60). the sox aren't asking him to be. we're not paying him to be that good. We could ask for one more average year, where he can try to raise his value for his own sake, and pitch in the 5 spot behind a pavano radke or clement.

Wright won't be the 5th starter (and we don't want him to be)... Odds are we won't be buying a 5th starter. Don't tell me Cotts is ready for the 5th spot. Diaz sure won't be. So what do you have? NO 5TH STARTER. deja vu all over again. I say hang on to what you got til you can fix the overall pitching situation (starters and Bullpen). Trade Garland when your team is ready for it. Or like I said, totally deconstruct this team, because it won't be worth a crap without pitching. Buy tickets to a KC/ Sox game.

chuckn98229
08-30-2004, 04:47 PM
The poor guy spent time in the cub organization, didn't he? Don't give up on him, yet. It takes time to work that crap out of your system.

jshanahanjr
08-30-2004, 05:51 PM
Can't the Sox take the money they will be saving from Maggs, Valentin, Koch, and get two solid starting pitchers via free agency? If you keep Garland, move him to the pen to fill Mike Jackson's role. Clement, Pavono, Santana to name a few guys that would fill the 4 & 5 spots.

kitekrazy
08-30-2004, 06:07 PM
The poor guy spent time in the cub organization, didn't he? Don't give up on him, yet. It takes time to work that crap out of your system.
LOL! He deserves at least one more year. If you look at our starters other than Contreras they aint lookin so hot either.
Mark B. looks like the next John Garland.

balke
08-30-2004, 06:47 PM
LOL! He deserves at least one more year. If you look at our starters other than Contreras they aint lookin so hot either.
Mark B. looks like the next John Garland.
I hate that you can say that about Mark, but it's true. Noone wants to admit it.

jeremyb1
08-30-2004, 09:26 PM
You guys want to replace Garland? Fine. But put your money where your mouth is, okay? Garland is non-tendered or traded for a mid level minor leaguer in the offseason. We save probably 3 or 4 million in payroll by dumping him (feel free to argue otherwise if you disagree) and we then have openings in the fourth and fifth spots. Who do you fill them with? How will they fit into next season's payroll (considering that barring a large payroll increase that no one reasonably expects at this point the budget is close to set with the Contreras acquisition and Garcia signing) and if the player is acquired in a trade what will we have to give up?

santo=dorf
08-30-2004, 09:52 PM
You guys want to replace Garland? Fine. But put your money where your mouth is, okay? Garland is non-tendered or traded for a mid level minor leaguer in the offseason. We save probably 3 or 4 million in payroll by dumping him (feel free to argue otherwise if you disagree) and we then have openings in the fourth and fifth spots. Who do you fill them with? How will they fit into next season's payroll (considering that barring a large payroll increase that no one reasonably expects at this point the budget is close to set with the Contreras acquisition and Garcia signing) and if the player is acquired in a trade what will we have to give up?
Odalis Perez should be signed as our #3 starter, and bump Contreras to the #4 spot. It would be a shame if Garland "earned" 4 million for next year.

jeremyb1
08-30-2004, 11:07 PM
Odalis Perez should be signed as our #3 starter, and bump Contreras to the #4 spot. It would be a shame if Garland "earned" 4 million for next year.

Well Odalis Perez is certainly good but he figures to make around 8 million dollars next season through arbitration next season which doesn't seem to fit in our budget. More importantly, he's an All-Star calliber starter, who do you propose we trade for him?

santo=dorf
08-30-2004, 11:32 PM
Well Odalis Perez is certainly good but he figures to make around 8 million dollars next season through arbitration next season which doesn't seem to fit in our budget. More importantly, he's an All-Star calliber starter, who do you propose we trade for him?He's a FA who will not have a good W-L record, no need for trading. Right now he is making 5 million. Where are you getting this figure of 8 million from?

Hangar18
08-31-2004, 09:05 AM
I agree! The guy has talent.. he just needs the mentality.
John Garland is a perfect #5 Starter. However, if he were in the National League, he would be awesome there. Print this for later use ........

jeremyb1
08-31-2004, 09:06 AM
He's a FA who will not have a good W-L record, no need for trading. Right now he is making 5 million. Where are you getting this figure of 8 million from?

Well I can't tell for certain that he's not a free agent but I can't find anything saying he is either. I guess I'll take your word for it. I'd assumed that since he only had half seasons his first two years he'd only be at five years service time after this season with one year left. Regardless, he's posted ERAs near three in two of his last three seasons. Ponson got 7 million for posting an ERA of 3.7 in just one season. If you think Perez is going to be available for 5 million, you're in for a reality check.

nccwsfan
08-31-2004, 09:32 AM
Well I can't tell for certain that he's not a free agent but I can't find anything saying he is either. I guess I'll take your word for it. I'd assumed that since he only had half seasons his first two years he'd only be at five years service time after this season with one year left. Regardless, he's posted ERAs near three in two of his last three seasons. Ponson got 7 million for posting an ERA of 3.7 in just one season. If you think Perez is going to be available for 5 million, you're in for a reality check.
Odalis Perez is a free agent this offseason. He is making $5 million now and will be making quite a bit more next year, no matter what team he signs with.

Garland's our #5- get used to it.

SEALgep
08-31-2004, 09:46 AM
Well I can't tell for certain that he's not a free agent but I can't find anything saying he is either. I guess I'll take your word for it. I'd assumed that since he only had half seasons his first two years he'd only be at five years service time after this season with one year left. Regardless, he's posted ERAs near three in two of his last three seasons. Ponson got 7 million for posting an ERA of 3.7 in just one season. If you think Perez is going to be available for 5 million, you're in for a reality check.The Sox are going in a new direction though. They've made it clear that the deep right handed power lineup isn't enough to get where we want to go. They're investing in pitching, which I agree with. Garland may be cheaper than a lot of options out there, but not necessarily our best option. Our budget will most likely see a moderate increase, we will be letting some of our contracts expire (Valentin likely not being resigned), and also probably looking to trade one our bats (ie Konerko or Lee). That will leave us with some considerable wiggle room to work with. Now Perez is certainly a realisitic option, as is Pavano. It's not as far-fetched as you present it, and I actually feel one of the two coming here is more of a probability, at least they'll be offered a competitive deal to consider.