PDA

View Full Version : Sox, Garland agree on 1-yr deal worth $3.4 M (...down the drain)


oldcomiskey
11-19-2004, 02:55 PM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041114soxgarland,1,7664605.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

Win1ForMe
11-19-2004, 03:00 PM
The White Sox and right-hander Jon Garland agreed on a one-year, $3.4 million contract Friday to avoid arbitration.http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041114soxgarland,1,7664605.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

mantis1212
11-19-2004, 03:02 PM
Huh?? $3.4MM for a .500 pticher? Buerhle makes $3.5MM for crying out loud!!

wdelaney72
11-19-2004, 03:02 PM
He'll be traded anyway.

Rocky Soprano
11-19-2004, 03:03 PM
That's what I'm thinking, they signed him, to get ready for a possible trade.

Justafan
11-19-2004, 03:09 PM
:roflmao: What next? 4M for Jason Grilli?

Flight #24
11-19-2004, 03:14 PM
Assuming that there are roughly 150 starters (5 x 30 teams), that's a pretty decent guess at what he'd get in arbitration.

Remember, despite the disappointment in Jon we feel as Sox fans, he was:
- 67th in MLB ERA
- Tied for 49th in # of quality starts
- 50th in MLB in WHIP
- Tied for 42d in MLB wins

So basically, he ranks somewhere in the 50s overall as a pitcher, which would make him a solid #2 or 3 starter when compared to the league overall.

Not saying that hed be a GOOD #2 or 3 starter for a team trying to make the playoffs, but when you look at what other pitchers make, and the way the arb process works, I can easily see him making 3-4mil.

That said, hopefully the stability in salary makes him a bit easier to trade for RJ or Kendall.

mrwag
11-19-2004, 03:30 PM
Goes to show how far a dollar goes these days!

Iwritecode
11-19-2004, 03:31 PM
It means it's easier to trade a player that is already signed to a contract...

infohawk
11-19-2004, 03:32 PM
It means it's easier to trade a player that is already signed to a contract...
I agree. If he is going to be moved it would probably be imminent.

Soxzilla
11-19-2004, 03:44 PM
Dammit why don't they just sign me. I'd gladly take only 100k to suck.

THEN I COULD BLAME MY SUCKNESS ON THE FANS!

WhiteSoxFan84
11-19-2004, 04:05 PM
You guys can hate all you want, he's going to have a break out season in 2005 and you will all regret the doubt. Here are my projected stats for Jonathan Garland;

15-13, 4.70 ERA

As good as that sounds, Sox fans will be disappointed when he pitches this well with the Diamondbacks.

MushMouth
11-19-2004, 04:07 PM
Well, I do think this is a precursor to a trade. Lets hope (or at least those of us who want to improve) we can actually score the Unit and this isn't going to result in a lateral move with another young, inconsistent arm.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-19-2004, 04:07 PM
Assuming that there are roughly 150 starters (5 x 30 teams), that's a pretty decent guess at what he'd get in arbitration.

Remember, despite the disappointment in Jon we feel as Sox fans, he was:
- 67th in MLB ERA
- Tied for 49th in # of quality starts
- 50th in MLB in WHIP
- Tied for 42d in MLB wins

So basically, he ranks somewhere in the 50s overall as a pitcher, which would make him a solid #2 or 3 starter when compared to the league overall.

Not saying that hed be a GOOD #2 or 3 starter for a team trying to make the playoffs, but when you look at what other pitchers make, and the way the arb process works, I can easily see him making 3-4mil.

That said, hopefully the stability in salary makes him a bit easier to trade for RJ or Kendall. After reading that, I'm so much more grateful of Garland. lol, good research flight. but let's face it, he hasn't been seriously tested in a division race or even worse, a playoff game. wait, regardless, he's a # 5 at best. maybe a # 6....

GiveMeSox
11-19-2004, 04:15 PM
That's what I'm thinking, they signed him, to get ready for a possible trade.
When a player signs a contract he cant be traded for i beleive the first 60 days. Its a rule in new signings to prevent sign and trades. If we didn't offer garland something around 3 mil we would have to offer arbitration to keep him. So its either pay him 3 mil now, or commit long term with pay around 5 to 6 mil via arbitration, or let him go. We made the best choice. The last thing we need is another hole in our rotation.

Hangar18
11-19-2004, 04:15 PM
You guys can hate all you want, he's going to have a break out season in 2005 and you will all regret the doubt. Here are my projected stats for Jonathan Garland;

15-13, 4.70 ERA

As good as that sounds, Sox fans will be disappointed when he pitches this well with the Diamondbacks.

Im with Soxfan84 on this ........ Jonny boy is going to BREAKOUT big time
in 2005 .......In the National League. He cant cut it over here, but if
he pitches in the weak-sister NL, watch how good the guy "suddenly"
becomes ...... they'll even talk about All-Star appearance for him, though
he wont be picked ........ Thats why I say, if we trade him over there,
we better get someone GOOD FOR HIM.

JGarlandrules20
11-19-2004, 04:16 PM
Dammit why don't they just sign me. I'd gladly take only 100k to suck.

THEN I COULD BLAME MY SUCKNESS ON THE FANS!
Hm...When did he blame his "suckness" on the fans?

Jon Garland isnt THAT bad. I think what makes people mad is that he has so much potential but really hasn't shown us much yet. But he's not "sucky"..not even close.

rdivaldi
11-19-2004, 04:18 PM
Huh?? $3.4MM for a .500 pticher? Buerhle makes $3.5MM for crying out loud!!
Buehrle is making $5.75 million this year...

WhiteSoxFan84
11-19-2004, 04:22 PM
When a player signs a contract he cant be traded for i beleive the first 60 days. Its a rule in new signings to prevent sign and trades. If we didn't offer garland something around 3 mil we would have to offer arbitration to keep him. So its either pay him 3 mil now, or commit long term with pay around 5 to 6 mil via arbitration, or let him go. We made the best choice. The last thing we need is another hole in our rotation.
I'm pretty sure you're right, but does that include player's re-signing with their current teams without filing for free agency? There might be a double standard there.

surfdudes
11-19-2004, 04:25 PM
Im with Soxfan84 on this ........ Jonny boy is going to BREAKOUT big time
in 2005 .......In the National League. He cant cut it over here, but if
he pitches in the weak-sister NL, watch how good the guy "suddenly"
becomes ...... they'll even talk about All-Star appearance for him, though
he wont be picked ........ Thats why I say, if we trade him over there,
we better get someone GOOD FOR HIM.
Or maybe he'll be on National TV in a world series game with his new team.........
God I hope this signing is preparation for the big trade that will be talked about for generations.....

SABRSox
11-19-2004, 05:43 PM
Over at The Hardball Times they have a Net Win Shares Value (http://http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/net-win-shares-value/) calculator that takes into account total win shares, expected win shares, a player's status (arbitration eligible, free agent, etc.) and a player's contract to come up with a total that determines how much of a deal or a loss a team takes on a certain player's contract. A Net Win Shares Value of $0 means the player played exactly the worth of his contract. A positive dollar value means the player performed more than his contract was worth, and was therefore a bargain to his team. A negative dollar value is the exact opposite.

Last season, Jon Garland had 11 total win shares, and was expected to have 12. At $2,300,000, and being arbitration eligible, his Net Win Shares Value was $-473,797. So the Sox lost, in theory, a half million on that contract.

I also plugged in his new contract, and kept the win share totals the same, just to experiment. If Jon shows absolutely no improvement, his Net Win Shares Value is $-1,662,483.

If the Sox are to get value on this contract, Garland is going to need to have an increase of only 2 win shares. I guess the Sox feel he's capable of doing this, but his BB/SO ratio hasn't made any dramatic shifts to sell me on his "breakout season." I'm expecting same old, same old...

Prove me wrong, Jon...

MRKARNO
11-19-2004, 05:52 PM
Over at The Hardball Times they have a Net Win Shares Value (http://http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/net-win-shares-value/) calculator that takes into account total win shares, expected win shares, a player's status (arbitration eligible, free agent, etc.) and a player's contract to come up with a total that determines how much of a deal or a loss a team takes on a certain player's contract. A Net Win Shares Value of $0 means the player played exactly the worth of his contract. A positive dollar value means the player performed more than his contract was worth, and was therefore a bargain to his team. A negative dollar value is the exact opposite.

Last season, Jon Garland had 11 total win shares, and was expected to have 12. At $2,300,000, and being arbitration eligible, his Net Win Shares Value was $-473,797. So the Sox lost, in theory, a half million on that contract.

I also plugged in his new contract, and kept the win share totals to same, just to experiment. If Jon shows absolutely no improvement, his Net Win Shares Value is $-1,662,483.

If the Sox are to get value on this contract, Garland is going to need to have an increase of only 2 win shares. I guess the Sox feel he's capable of doing this, but his BB/SO ratio hasn't made any dramatic shifts to sell me on his "breakout season." I'm expecting same old, same old...

Prove me wrong, Jon...
Welcome to WSI!

Pretty good analysis, I think that's pretty much the general consensus, that he needs to improve at least a bit to be worth what he's to be paid. I'm dissapointed that he took a step backwards last year and would like to see him revert to 2003 form at very least.

kitekrazy
11-19-2004, 07:45 PM
This is what is so sickening about professional sports mainly in MLB and NBA. The Garland signing shows you how overpriced mediocrity is.

johnny_mostil
11-19-2004, 08:04 PM
Remember, despite the disappointment in Jon we feel as Sox fans, he was:
- 67th in MLB ERA
- Tied for 49th in # of quality starts
- 50th in MLB in WHIP
- Tied for 42d in MLB wins


His ERA and our impression of him are affected by USCF. This ain't 1980 anymore, the league average ERA is over 5 in USCF, and we make mistake after mistake if we forget that. He's an average major league starting pitcher and he's, what, 25?

Daver
11-19-2004, 08:10 PM
When a player signs a contract he cant be traded for i beleive the first 60 days. Its a rule in new signings to prevent sign and trades. If we didn't offer garland something around 3 mil we would have to offer arbitration to keep him. So its either pay him 3 mil now, or commit long term with pay around 5 to 6 mil via arbitration, or let him go. We made the best choice. The last thing we need is another hole in our rotation.
Ummm, he's not eligible for FA, so arbitration for him would be a strictly one year deal.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-19-2004, 09:23 PM
Hopefully Jon Garland will show some improvement (as a White Sox). I think this is a fair deal and something the Sox had to do. Contreras is a MUCH bigger ? than Garland and is being paid almost twice this amount. They have Mark B and Garcia and hopefully 1 or (in my dreams 2) SPs on the way (Leiber).

Garland is certainly better than most players signed (or resigned) to date (at the same salary range). I think Takatsu and Garland (and Politte at $1 mil) have been good signs by the Sox (and Takatsu was a good pick by Williams last year - he and Otsuka of SD were clearly overlooked int he FA market).

RP Shingo Takatsu - 1 year $2.5 mil 26.5 VORP
SP Jon Garland - 1 year $3.4 mil 25.2 VORP


SP Cory Liddle - 2 Year $3.15 mil (per year) 12.3 VORP
SP Brett Tomko - 1 year $2.5 mil 26.2 VORP
SP Chris Carpenter - 1 year $2.0 mil 41.6 VORP (If healthy better than Garland)

RP Jose Mesa - 1 year $2.5 mil 17.9 VORP
RP Ugueth Urbina - 1 year $4 mil 9.7 VORP

C Bengie Molina - 1 year $3 mil VORP 13.3
C Jason LaRue - 1 year $3 mil VORP 18.4

3B Vinnie Castilla - 2 year $3.1 mil (per year) 35.4 VORP (Will go down outa Coors)
3B Bill Mueller - 1 year $2.5 mil 23.1 VORP

SS Christian Guzman - 4 year $4.2 mil (per year) 14.8 VORP
SS Omar Vizquel - 3 year $4.083 mil (per year) 35.5 VORP

1B Rafael Palmeiro - 1 year $3 mil VORP 31.3
1B J.T. Snow - 1 year $2 mil VORP 46.9 (Fluke season)

OF Craig Biggio - 1 year $3 mil VORP 30.2
OF Marquis Grissom - 1 year $2.5 mil VORP 25.3

StillMissOzzie
11-19-2004, 11:43 PM
"It isn't the high price of stars that is expensive, it's the high price of mediocrity." - Bill Veeck


True

SMO
:gulp:

SouthSide_HitMen
11-20-2004, 06:55 PM
Looks like JR and his Bulls partners (many are also Sox owner partners) lost well over $3.4 mil yesterday. I hope this doesn't effect the 2005 budget for our Chicago White Sox.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/sports/3935695/detail.html

Click for video link of JR losing ca$h.

Tragg
11-20-2004, 07:29 PM
Hopefully Jon Garland will show some improvement (as a White Sox). I think this is a fair deal and something the Sox had to do. Contreras is a MUCH bigger ? than Garland and is being paid almost twice this amount. They have Mark B and Garcia and hopefully 1 or (in my dreams 2) SPs on the way (Leiber).

Garland is certainly better than most players signed (or resigned) to date (at the same salary range). I think Takatsu and Garland (and Politte at $1 mil) have been good signs by the Sox (and Takatsu was a good pick by Williams last year - he and Otsuka of SD were clearly overlooked int he FA market).

RP Shingo Takatsu - 1 year $2.5 mil 26.5 VORP
SP Jon Garland - 1 year $3.4 mil 25.2 VORP


SP Cory Liddle - 2 Year $3.15 mil (per year) 12.3 VORP
SP Brett Tomko - 1 year $2.5 mil 26.2 VORP
SP Chris Carpenter - 1 year $2.0 mil 41.6 VORP (If healthy better than Garland)

RP Jose Mesa - 1 year $2.5 mil 17.9 VORP
RP Ugueth Urbina - 1 year $4 mil 9.7 VORP

C Bengie Molina - 1 year $3 mil VORP 13.3
C Jason LaRue - 1 year $3 mil VORP 18.4

3B Vinnie Castilla - 2 year $3.1 mil (per year) 35.4 VORP (Will go down outa Coors)
3B Bill Mueller - 1 year $2.5 mil 23.1 VORP

SS Christian Guzman - 4 year $4.2 mil (per year) 14.8 VORP
SS Omar Vizquel - 3 year $4.083 mil (per year) 35.5 VORP

1B Rafael Palmeiro - 1 year $3 mil VORP 31.3
1B J.T. Snow - 1 year $2 mil VORP 46.9 (Fluke season)

OF Craig Biggio - 1 year $3 mil VORP 30.2
OF Marquis Grissom - 1 year $2.5 mil VORP 25.3
I just as soon have him as most on that list; what's a VORP?

Flight #24
11-20-2004, 07:40 PM
I just as soon have him as most on that list; what's a VORP?
Value Over Replacement Player. Essentially, how much better than a generally available guy would be. Not sure if they estimate how much that generally available guy would cost.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-20-2004, 07:42 PM
I just as soon have him as most on that list; what's a VORP?
I also like the Sox two signings (Takatsu & Garland) as they are in the correct market price (Takatsu a lower tier closer, Garland a #4 starter) as I posted the recent signings with similar stats / contracts.

VORP is a Baseball Prospectus term meaning "Value Over Replacement-level Player". VORP is a number which one can compare players from different positions or even a pitcher vs. a hitter.

A replacement player is a AAAA (quadruple A) player - The guy on the bench you would replace an injured / benched starter / reliever.

BP states it best - "It is the expected level of performance a major league team can receive from one or more of the best available players who substitute for a suddenlt unavailable starting player at the same position and who can be (or were) obtained with minimal expenditure of team resources (ie. league minimum)."

VORP takes into account defense. As you can see from the list - both Sox signings (in teal) either exceeded same signed players in cost or were better deals (either age or contract term) than those signed for more $.

Derek Lowe had a negative VORP in 2004 - meaning he performed worse than the average league minimum player. That is why I was glad the Sox signed who they did (Takatsu & Garland) and hope they do not pursue Lowe (-11 VORP).

It looks like the White Sox already passed on Carl Pavano as the Sox are not one of the teams he is visiting.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpcDBuM2RlBF9TAzk1ODYxNzc3BHNlYwN0 aA--?slug=ap-freeagents-pavano&prov=ap&type=lgns

Boston, Seattle, Detroit, New York and Baltimore

ewokpelts
11-20-2004, 07:53 PM
You guys can hate all you want, he's going to have a break out season in 2005 and you will all regret the doubt. Here are my projected stats for Jonathan Garland;

15-13, 4.70 ERA

As good as that sounds, Sox fans will be disappointed when he pitches this well with the Diamondbacks.:hawk

Mercy!

johnny_mostil
11-20-2004, 07:57 PM
Value Over Replacement Player. Essentially, how much better than a generally available guy would be. Not sure if they estimate how much that generally available guy would cost.
Major league minimum salary. The VORP is the difference between a player and the level of ability where you can get all the players you want for nothing because nobody thinks they are worth a dose of Desenex.

Who is a replacement player? Players with VORPs of virtually 0 last year included Expo SS Alex Gonzales (who just got replaced by Cristian Guzman), 3B Tony Batista (who just got replaced), Pittsburgh reliever John Grabow, and (surprise) former Sox mound victim Jon Rauch.

Another way of looking at it is, how much better is this guy than, well, the typical player on the 2003 Tigers.

Tragg
11-20-2004, 08:19 PM
Another way of looking at it is, how much better is this guy than, well, the typical player on the 2003 Tigers. LOL - perfect explanation!

Garland is signed to be our #5 starter; replace his efforts with the starter by committee from last year, and we win a few more ball games I would think.

If we can't get Johnson, sign Perez or someone for $7 million and we have a pretty darn good staff. Add a leadoff hitter, and we're a lot better.